Previous studies demonstrated that the continuation task has great language learning potential and that various task-related factors may affect the extent to which the potential can be exploited (e.g. Wang & Wang, 2015). This study investigates the effect of one understudied factor, the linguistic complexity of the input text, on English as a foreign language (EFL) learners’ alignment, writing fluency, and writing accuracy in the continuation task. Two comparable groups of Chinese undergraduate EFL learners read and continued a simplified and unsimplified version of the same incomplete story whose linguistic complexity matched and exceeded their production ability, respectively. Compared to the unsimplified version, the simplified version resulted in more automatic alignment and greater improvement in writing fluency and accuracy. The implications of these findings for writing pedagogy are discussed.
AnthonyL. (2014). AntConc: Version 3.4.1w [computer software]. Tokyo: Waseda University. Available at: http://www.laurenceanthony.net (accessed June 2018).
2.
AtkinsonD.NishinoT.ChurchillE.OkadaH. (2007). Alignment and interaction in a sociocognitive approach to second language acquisition. The Modern Language Journal, 91, 169–188.
3.
BabaK.NittaR. (2014). Phase transitions in development of writing fluency from a complex dynamic systems perspective. Language Learning, 64, 1–35.
4.
BultéB.HousenA. (2014). Conceptualizing and measuring short-term changes in L2 writing complexity. Journal of Second Language Writing, 26, 42–65.
5.
ChallJ.S.DaleE. (1995). Readability reviewed: The new Dale–Chall readability formula. Cambridge, MA: Brookline Books.
6.
ChangC. (2006). Effects of topic familiarity and linguistic difficulty on the reading strategies and mental representations of nonnative readers of Chinese. Journal of Language Learning, 4, 172–198.
7.
ClarkE.V. (1993). The lexicon in acquisition. New York: Cambridge University Press.
8.
CostaA.PickeringM.J.SoraceA. (2008). Alignment in second language dialogue. Language and Cognitive Processes, 23, 528–556.
9.
DroopM.VerhoevenL. (1998). Background knowledge, linguistic complexity and second-language reading comprehension. Journal of Literacy Research, 30, 253–271.
10.
EllisR. (2003). Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
11.
FengS.D’MelloS.GraesserA.C. (2013). Mind wandering while reading easy and difficulty texts. Psychonomic Bulletin Review, 20, 586–592.
12.
GassS.M.SelinkerL. (2008). Second language acquisition: An introduction course. 3rd edition.New York: Routledge.
13.
GeranpayehA. (2003). A quick view of the English Quick Placement Test. Research Notes, 12, 8–10.
14.
HiebertE.H.MesmerH.A.E. (2013). Upping the ante of text complexity in the Common Core State Standards: Examining its potential impact on young readers. Educational Researcher, 42, 44–51.
15.
HundtM.SandA.SkanderaP. (1999). Manual of information to accompany the Freiburg-Brown Corpus of American English. Freiburg: Department of English, Albert-Ludwigs-Universität Freiburg.
16.
HuntK.W. (1970). Syntactic maturity in schoolchildren and adults. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 35, 1–67.
17.
JiangW. (2013). Measurements of development in L2 written production: the case of L2 Chinese. Applied Linguistics, 34, 1–24.
18.
JinT.LuX. (2018). A data-driven approach to text adaptation in teaching material preparation: Design, implementation and teacher professional development. TESOL Quarterly, 52, 257–267.
19.
LatifM.M.M.A. (2013). What do we mean by writing fluency and how can it be validly measured?Applied Linguistics, 34, 99–105.
20.
LauferB.ParibakhtS. (1998). The relationship between passive and active vocabularies: Effects of language learning context. Language Learning, 48, 365–391.
21.
LuX. (2011). A corpus-based evaluation of syntactic complexity measures as indices of college-level ESL writers’ language development. TESOL Quarterly, 45, 36–62.
22.
LuX. (2014). Computational methods for corpus annotation and analysis. Dordrecht: Springer.
23.
LuX. (2017). Automated measurement of syntactic complexity in corpus-based L2 writing research and implications for writing assessment. Language Testing, 34, 493–511.
24.
McGregorA.K. (1989). The effect of word frequency and social class on children’s reading comprehension. Reading, 23, 105–115.
25.
NishinoT.AtkinsonD. (2015). Second language writing as sociocognitive alignment. Journal of Second Language Writing, 27, 37–54.
26.
NorrisJ.M.OrtegaL. (2009). Towards an organic approach to investigating CAF in instructed SLA: The case of complexity. Applied Linguistics, 30, 555–578.
27.
O’ConnorR.E.SwansonH.L.GeraghtyC. (2010). Improvement in reading rate under independent and difficult text levels: Influences on word and comprehension skills. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102, 1–19.
28.
OrtegaL. (2011). Reflections on the learning-to-write and writing-to-learn dimensions of second language writing. In R.M.Manchón (Ed.), Learning-to-write and write-to-learn in an additional language (pp. 237–250). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
29.
PangY. (2014). The effect of peer interaction on alignment in a continuation task. Unpublished master’s thesis, Guangdong University of Foreign Studies, Guangzhou, China.
30.
PickeringM.J.GarrodS. (2004). Toward a mechanistic psychology of dialogue. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 27, 169–226.
31.
PlakansL.GebrilA. (2013). Using multiple texts in an integrated writing assessment: Source text use as a predictor of score. Journal of Second Language Writing, 22, 217–230.
32.
PolioC.SheaM.C. (2014). An investigation into current measures of linguistic accuracy in second language writing research. Journal of Second Language Writing, 26, 10–27.
33.
QiL.WangC. (1988). Background knowledge and language complexity in reading comprehension. Foreign Language Teaching and Research, 2, 24–30.
34.
ReitterD.MooreJ.D. (2014). Alignment and task success in spoken dialogue. Journal of Memory and Language, 76, 29–46.
35.
RobinsonP. (2003). Attention and memory during SLA. In C.J.DoughtyLongM.H. (Eds.), The handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 631–678). Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
36.
SawakiY.QuinlanT.LeeY. (2013). Understanding learner weaknesses and strengths: assessing performance on an integrated writing task. Language Assessment Quarterly, 10, 73–95.
37.
SiddharthanA. (2006). Syntactic simplification and text cohesion. Research on Language and Computation, 4, 77–109.
38.
SkehanP.FosterP. (2007). Cognition and tasks. In P.Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 287–318). Beijing: World Publishing Corporation.
39.
SwainM.LapkinS. (1998). Interaction and second language learning: Two adolescent French immersion students working together. The Modern Language Journal, 82, 320–337.
40.
TangL. (2000). A preliminary study of foreign language learners’ errors. Foreign Languages and Their Teaching, 12, 56–58.
41.
VanPattenB. (2007). Processing instruction. In SanzC. (Ed.), Mind and context in adult second language acquisition (pp. 267–281). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
42.
WangC. (2009). A study of the interrelationship between L2 learning variables and L2 use. Foreign Languages in China, 6, 53–59.
43.
WangC. (2012). The continuation task: An effective way to facilitate L2 learning. Foreign Language World, 5, 2–7.
44.
WangC. (2016). Learning by extension. Modern Foreign Languages, 6, 784–793.
45.
WangC.WangM. (2015). Effect of alignment on L2 written production. Applied Linguistics, 36, 503–526.
46.
WilliamsJ. (2012). The potential role(s) of writing in second language development. Journal of Second Language Writing, 21, 321–331.
47.
Wolfe-QuinteroK.InagakiS.KimH.Y. (1998). Second language development in writing: Measures of fluency, accuracy, and complexity. Honolulu, HI: University of Hawaii at Manoa.
48.
XueH. (2013). Interest-related alignment in L2 story continuation. Unpublished master’s thesis, Guangdong University of Foreign Studies, Guangzhou, China.
49.
YangX. (2005). An introduction to linguistics. Beijing: Higher Education Press.
50.
YuanD. (2013). The effect of task instructions on L2 writing from the perspective of alignment. Unpublished master’s thesis, Guangdong University of Foreign Studies, Guangzhou, China.
51.
ZhangX. (2017). Reading–writing integrated tasks, comprehensive corrective feedback, and EFL writing development. Language Teaching Research, 21, 217–240.
52.
ZwaanR.A.RadvanskyG.A. (1998). Situation models in language comprehension and memory. Psychological Bulletin, 123, 162–185.
