The current study investigated the language behaviour of older adults before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Linguistic complexity (LC)—a measure of lexical and morpho-syntactic richness—is an index of both cognitive functioning and creativity. The increased physical and social isolation during the pandemic yielded reports of heightened levels of creativity as well as cognitive decline, bringing forth two counter-directed predictions: (1) given the threat to cognitive functioning posed by the pandemic, LC may steadily decrease following the onset of the pandemic, or; (2) consistent with the creativity boost reported during lockdowns, LC may be greater after the onset of the pandemic. This work analyzed the syntactic and lexical complexity of texts from the CoSoWELL corpus (v1.0), a collection of personal narratives written by 1028 mature adults (55+) collected at five test sessions spanning before (t1) and after (t2-t5) the beginning of the pandemic. Two lexical variables (type-token ratio; noun-verb ratio) and six syntactic variables (two syntactic variants of type-token ratio; embeddedness; D-ratio; longest dependency path; mean length utterance) were used to calculate LC. All measures saw statistically significant gains from t1 to t2, and further increased across subsequent test sessions. These findings confirmed the second hypothesis and, I argue, support a pandemic-related boost to creativity. / Thesis / Master of Science (MSc) / The COVID-19 pandemic has been isolating, and isolation is a mixed bag: being alone promotes self-reflection and overthinking, and doing too much is linked to stress and mental illness. However, more time spent in solitude is also linked to greater creativity. Creativity means more new ideas, which come through as longer, more detailed sentences, with less repetition. This research looked at stories by older adults about their lives, written before and during the pandemic. Surprisingly, the language in the stories became more descriptive and diverse over time—meaning people were being more creative after COVID-19 hit. In the wake of this lonely storm, one silver lining has emerged: whether in spite of or because of this pandemic, creativity is flourishing.

Es natural que la lengua materna de un bilingüe cambie. Sin embargo, si un individuo vive en un contexto donde se habla su segunda lengua como lengua mayoritaria, si usa constantemente su segunda lengua y si el uso de su lengua materna ha disminuido, es muy probable que se vea afectado por la atrición de las habilidades lingüísticas. Esta investigación se concentra en el estudio de la atrición léxica del español como lengua materna. Los participantes son mexicanos adultos con educación universitaria entre los 25 y los 35 años de edad, los participantes del grupo experimental (n=10) inmigraron a los Estados Unidos después de los 17 años de edad, y han vivido en este país entre 5 y 16 años. Los participantes del grupo de control (n=10) residen en México y nunca han vivido en un país de habla inglesa. Tres medidas se obtuvieron y analizaron estadísticamente para determinar si el grupo experimental está siendo afectado por la atrición de la lengua: en las medidas de diversidad y la sofisticación léxica los resultados de la investigación revelaron una diferencia estadísticamente significativa entre ambos grupos. Estos resultados resultan similares a los de Keijzer (2017), Schmid y Dusseldrop (2011); y Yilmaz y Schmid (2012). No hubo diferencia en la prueba de fluidez verbal. Los resultados no revelaron significancia de la edad, el tiempo de arribo y el sexo en la media de los resultados, y de la misma manera no se encontró una correlación de los resultados de las pruebas léxicas con el uso del idioma, debido quizá al tamaño de la muestra.

abstract: Lexical diversity (LD) has been used in a wide range of applications, producing a rich history in the field of speech-language pathology. However, for clinicians and researchers identifying a robust measure to quantify LD has been challenging. Recently, sophisticated techniques have been developed that assert to measure LD. Each one is based on its own theoretical assumptions and employs different computational machineries. Therefore, it is not clear to what extent these techniques produce valid scores and how they relate to each other. Further, in the field of speech-language pathology, researchers and clinicians often use different methods to elicit various types of discourse and it is an empirical question whether the inferences drawn from analyzing one type of discourse relate and generalize to other types. The current study examined a corpus of four types of discourse (procedures, eventcasts, storytelling, recounts) from 442 adults. Using four techniques (D; Maas; Measure of textual lexical diversity, MTLD; Moving average type token ratio, MATTR), LD scores were estimated for each type. Subsequently, data were modeled using structural equation modeling to uncover their latent structure. Results indicated that two estimation techniques (MATTR and MTLD) generated scores that were stronger indicators of the LD of the language samples. For the other two techniques, results were consistent with the presence of method factors that represented construct-irrelevant sources. A hierarchical factor analytic model indicated that a common factor underlay all combinations of types of discourse and estimation techniques and was interpreted as a general construct of LD. Two discourse types (storytelling and eventcasts) were significantly stronger indicators of the underlying trait. These findings supplement our understanding regarding the validity of scores generated by different estimation techniques. Further, they enhance our knowledge about how productive vocabulary manifests itself across different types of discourse that impose different cognitive and linguistic demands. They also offer clinicians and researchers a point of reference in terms of techniques that measure the LD of a language sample and little of anything else and also types of discourse that might be the most informative for measuring the LD of individuals. / Dissertation/Thesis / Ph.D. Speech and Hearing Science 2011

The present study, a quantitative lexical analysis, examines the extent to which vocabulary size and lexical diversity contribute to writing scores on advanced non-native speakers’ and native speakers’ academic compositions. The data consists of essays composed by 104 adult non-native English learners enrolled in advanced second language writing courses and 68 native speaking university students in a first-year composition course. The lexical diversity of the sample essays is quantified by both the Measure of Textual Lexical Diversity (MTLD) and the voc-D while vocabulary size is measured by CELEX word frequency means, three instruments that are available in the computational linguistics program Coh-Metrix 3.0. Writing scores are provided by three independent raters’ evaluations according to the TOEFL iBT Independent Writing Rubric. Results from a binary logistic regression reveal that lexical diversity has a significantly greater impact on writing score than vocabulary size (p < .01). Nevertheless, a series of MANOVAs indicate that vocabulary size initially facilitates writing scores at the lower proficiency levels, but it is an essay’s lexical diversity that promotes it to the higher score levels. Additional findings from the MANOVAs demonstrate that native speakers’ profiles of lexical diversity and size are significantly different from their non-native peers (p < .001). The lexical profiles also differed significantly among the individual score levels of the TOEFL iBT rubric (p < .05). A final outcome from a Pearson’s product moment correlation analysis shows that iii vocabulary size has only a moderate relationship to lexical diversity, suggesting that variation of mid-range vocabulary may be more important to writing proficiency than the use of more sophisticated terms that occur less frequently in natural language. Implications for practice suggest that it is not enough to simply teach vocabulary words in the L2 composition classroom, but also to guide learners in how to employ these words in a varied manner within their writing. Furthermore, the results of this study indicate that teachers should spend more time on helping students use medium frequency words along with synonyms of a similar frequency rather than teaching students infrequent vocabulary, which may appear to sound more advanced.

No description available.

Several theorists (amongst whom Halliday & Matthiessen, 2004:175) have stated that the verb (or the verbal group) is the core element in clauses and is largely responsible for the grammatical structure of language. In spite of this pivotal role that verbs fulfil in clauses, lexical specificity is rarely investigated in this class. Instead researchers prefer to investigate lexical specificity in the noun class. It is against this background that the main purpose of this study is to investigate specificity in the lexical verbs of first language (L1) English users and Black South African English (BSAE) users. In order to achieve this aim the secondary aims of the study are: to develop a framework for the analysis of lexical specificity in the lexical verb word class (ii) to compare specificity with regard to lexical verbs in L1 English and BSAE by using corpora, which allows one to firstly test the analysis framework on corpus data and secondly to determine whether or not lexical verbs in BSAE are less specific than lexical verbs in L1 English (iii) to establish the reasons for the differences in lexical specificity with regard to lexical verbs between L1 English and BSAE English. In order to achieve these aims, two corpora were used: the Louvain Corpus of Native English Essays (also known as LOCNESS) that consists of texts written by a subpopulation of L1 English users and the Tswana Learner English Corpus (also known as the TLE) that consists of texts written by a subpopulation of BSAE users. The results obtained in this study were interpreted from both a systemic functional perspective and a cognitive perspective. The initial quantitative results indicated that even though the BSAE users use lexical verbs (tokens) more frequently than L1 English users do, the BSAE users have fewer lexical verb lemmas (types) at their disposal than the L1 English users. Statistical tests determined that the mean type/token ratio between the two independent corpora is not only significant, but that the degree to which there is more specificity in the lexical verbs of the L1 English users than in the lexical verbs of the BSAE users is large. Due to space constraints, the qualitative part of the study focused only on the communication verbs in LOCNESS and the TLE. In order to provide an in-depth overview of the communication verbs, the communication verbs were divided into five semantic subcategories (using frequency counts and semantic considerations). They are: (i) to say something in a particular manner] (ii) to say something in order to express one’s feelings] (iii) to say something in order to convey information] (iv) to say something to someone in order to elicit a certain response] (v) to say something in response to something already said] Each of these semantic categories in turn was divided into semantic subcategories to present a detailed insight into the communication verbs employed in both LOCNESS and the TLE. In the study it was determined that there is overall more specificity in the lexical verbs of the L1 English users than in the lexical verbs of the L2 English users. It was also determined that there is overall more lexical diversity within the lexical verbs of the L1 English users. The following factors influenced the lexical specificity and lexical diversity in the corpora: (i) In cases where more general communication verbs are elaborated by verbs containing manner elaborations, the BSAE users tend not to use the more specific verbs. (ii) Communication verbs that usually play an important role in academic literacy (such as summarise and argue) are used to a lesser extent by the BSAE users than the L1 English users. (iii) In cases where a communication verb could possibly belong to another semantic category (as is the case with the verbs stress and maintain) the BSAE users tend to avoid using the verbs as communication verbs. (iv) Some communication verbs (such as demand and beg) acquired additional meanings in BSAE. (v) Some essay topics in both LOCNESS and the TLE influenced the frequencies of some communication verbs in the respective corpora. Considering the factors above, it was found that being a L2 English user means that English will not always function in the same contexts for the BSAE users as it would for the L1 English users. Therefore the vocabulary of the BSAE users will only be specific and diversified in those semantic categories needed to function in certain contexts. Consequently, the findings of this study can be used to contribute to the development of pedagogical material in academic literacy courses being presented to BSAE users to create an awareness of the variation in English and all the contexts in which it can function. The findings can also be of value to researchers in the fields of lexicography and computational linguistics. / Thesis (M.A. (English))--North-West University, Vaal Triangle Campus, 2011

Several theorists (amongst whom Halliday & Matthiessen, 2004:175) have stated that the verb (or the verbal group) is the core element in clauses and is largely responsible for the grammatical structure of language. In spite of this pivotal role that verbs fulfil in clauses, lexical specificity is rarely investigated in this class. Instead researchers prefer to investigate lexical specificity in the noun class. It is against this background that the main purpose of this study is to investigate specificity in the lexical verbs of first language (L1) English users and Black South African English (BSAE) users. In order to achieve this aim the secondary aims of the study are: to develop a framework for the analysis of lexical specificity in the lexical verb word class (ii) to compare specificity with regard to lexical verbs in L1 English and BSAE by using corpora, which allows one to firstly test the analysis framework on corpus data and secondly to determine whether or not lexical verbs in BSAE are less specific than lexical verbs in L1 English (iii) to establish the reasons for the differences in lexical specificity with regard to lexical verbs between L1 English and BSAE English. In order to achieve these aims, two corpora were used: the Louvain Corpus of Native English Essays (also known as LOCNESS) that consists of texts written by a subpopulation of L1 English users and the Tswana Learner English Corpus (also known as the TLE) that consists of texts written by a subpopulation of BSAE users. The results obtained in this study were interpreted from both a systemic functional perspective and a cognitive perspective. The initial quantitative results indicated that even though the BSAE users use lexical verbs (tokens) more frequently than L1 English users do, the BSAE users have fewer lexical verb lemmas (types) at their disposal than the L1 English users. Statistical tests determined that the mean type/token ratio between the two independent corpora is not only significant, but that the degree to which there is more specificity in the lexical verbs of the L1 English users than in the lexical verbs of the BSAE users is large. Due to space constraints, the qualitative part of the study focused only on the communication verbs in LOCNESS and the TLE. In order to provide an in-depth overview of the communication verbs, the communication verbs were divided into five semantic subcategories (using frequency counts and semantic considerations). They are: (i) to say something in a particular manner] (ii) to say something in order to express one’s feelings] (iii) to say something in order to convey information] (iv) to say something to someone in order to elicit a certain response] (v) to say something in response to something already said] Each of these semantic categories in turn was divided into semantic subcategories to present a detailed insight into the communication verbs employed in both LOCNESS and the TLE. In the study it was determined that there is overall more specificity in the lexical verbs of the L1 English users than in the lexical verbs of the L2 English users. It was also determined that there is overall more lexical diversity within the lexical verbs of the L1 English users. The following factors influenced the lexical specificity and lexical diversity in the corpora: (i) In cases where more general communication verbs are elaborated by verbs containing manner elaborations, the BSAE users tend not to use the more specific verbs. (ii) Communication verbs that usually play an important role in academic literacy (such as summarise and argue) are used to a lesser extent by the BSAE users than the L1 English users. (iii) In cases where a communication verb could possibly belong to another semantic category (as is the case with the verbs stress and maintain) the BSAE users tend to avoid using the verbs as communication verbs. (iv) Some communication verbs (such as demand and beg) acquired additional meanings in BSAE. (v) Some essay topics in both LOCNESS and the TLE influenced the frequencies of some communication verbs in the respective corpora. Considering the factors above, it was found that being a L2 English user means that English will not always function in the same contexts for the BSAE users as it would for the L1 English users. Therefore the vocabulary of the BSAE users will only be specific and diversified in those semantic categories needed to function in certain contexts. Consequently, the findings of this study can be used to contribute to the development of pedagogical material in academic literacy courses being presented to BSAE users to create an awareness of the variation in English and all the contexts in which it can function. The findings can also be of value to researchers in the fields of lexicography and computational linguistics. / Thesis (M.A. (English))--North-West University, Vaal Triangle Campus, 2011

This study explores the dynamics of persuasive communication within the context of the r/AmItheAsshole subreddit, a platform that serves as a space for individuals to share real-life conflicts, inviting impartial judgments from the Reddit community, so-called flairs. Grounded in Communication Accommodation Theory and existing research on persuasion, the study explores the impact of language attributes on persuasive outcomes, using hypothesis testing to determine significant differences between the different flairs and two broader binary categories of blame. The research aims to investigate the impact of several language attributes on persuasion and the role of language style alignment between the communicator and the recipient in shaping persuasive outcomes. Only the attribute sentiment exhibited a visual difference between the flairs, which was significant for most flairs but non-significant for the combined categories. This complexity regarding the flair categories suggests that sentiment affects persuasion but warrants further investigation in future studies. Regarding the language style similarity, a visual difference was observed only for the difference in the attribute lexical diversity, and significant results were obtained for all tested combinations. Contrary to Communication Accommodation Theory expectations, the study found that similarity in language style, specifically lexical diversity, negatively influences outcomes, raising questions for future exploration. The study provides nuanced insights into the interplay of language attributes and persuasive success in online contexts and takes an initial step toward investigating Communication Accommodation Theory in persuasion.

Brown (1973) a proposé la « longueur moyenne des énoncés » (LME) comme indice standard du développement langagier. La LME se calcule selon le nombre moyen de morphèmes dans 100 énoncés de parole spontanée. L’hypothèse sous-jacente à cet indice est que la complexité syntaxique croît avec le nombre de morphèmes dans les énoncés. Selon Brown, l’indice permet d’estimer le développement d’une « compétence grammaticale » jusqu’à environ quatre morphèmes. Certains auteurs ont toutefois critiqué le manque de fiabilité de la LME et la limite de quatre morphèmes. Des rapports démontrent des variations de la LME avec l’âge, ce qui suggère que des facteurs comme la croissance des capacités respiratoires peuvent influencer l’indice de Brown. La présente étude fait état de ces problèmes et examine comment la LME et certaines mesures de diversité lexicale varient selon le développement des capacités respiratoires. On a calculé la LME et la diversité lexicale dans la parole spontanée de 50 locuteurs mâles âgés de 5 à 27 ans. On a également mesuré, au moyen d’un pneumotachographe, la capacité vitale (CV) des locuteurs. Les résultats démontrent que la LME et des mesures de diversité lexicale corrèlent fortement avec la croissance de la CV. Ainsi, la croissance des fonctions respiratoires contraint le développement morphosyntaxique et lexical. Notre discussion fait valoir la nécessité de réévaluer l’indice de la LME et la conception « linguistique » du développement langagier comme une compétence mentale qui émerge séparément de la croissance des structures de performance. / Brown (1973) proposed the « mean length of utterance » (MLU) as a standard index of language development. MLU is calculated by counting the mean number of morphemes in 100 utterances of spontaneous speech. The underlying hypothesis of this index is that syntactic complexity rises with the number of morphemes in utterances. According to Brown, MLU indexes the development of a « grammatical competence » up to about four morphemes. However, authors have criticized the lack of reliability of the MLU and the limit of four morphemes. Reported variations in MLU with age also suggest that factors such as the growth of respiratory capacities can influence Brown’s index. The present study reviews those problems and examines how the MLU and certain measures of lexical diversity vary according to the development of respiratory capacities. We calculated the MLU and the lexical diversity in the spontaneous speech of 50 male speakers aged 5 to 27 years. We also measured, with a pneumotachograph, the vital capacity (VC) of the speakers. The results show that MLU and measures of lexical diversity strongly correlate with the growth of VC. Thus, the growth of respiratory functions constrains morphosyntactic and lexical development. Our discussion focuses on the necessity to revaluate the MLU index and a « linguistic » conception of language development as a mental competence emerging separately from the growth of performance structures.

CoordenaÃÃo de AperfeÃoamento de Pessoal de NÃvel Superior / Programa de Doutorado-sanduÃche no Exterior / O objeto de estudo do presente trabalho à o conhecimento lexical evidenciado em produÃÃes escritas de aprendizes de PortuguÃs como LÃngua Adicional (PLA). AtravÃs de um design exploratÃrio, a partir do corpus (Recolha de Corpora de PLA da Universidade de Coimbra), investigamos os estÃgios de desenvolvimento da interlÃngua (IL) na tentativa de comparar a diversidade lexical, examinando a variaÃÃo dos nÃveis de proficiÃncia estabelecidos de acordo com os Ãndices calculados pela ferramenta texinspector workflow. A pesquisa encontra apoio em estudos de conhecimento lexical de Cobb (2003), Engber (1995), Hulstijn (1996, 2001, 2011, 2015), Laufer (1995, 1998, 2004), Meara (1980, 2005), Milton (2009), Nation (2001, 2004, 2011, 2012), Read (2004) e Jarvis (2013a, 1013b), que consideram os textos escritos como uma fonte potencialmente rica de informaÃÃes sobre o desenvolvimento do vocabulÃrio da L2 ou da lÃngua adicional (LA). O pressuposto subjacente à que o estÃgio de desenvolvimento da interlÃngua (IL) pode servir como um indicador de proficiÃncia mais elevada, juntamente com a noÃÃo de um nÃcleo comum de uso da lÃngua em questÃo. Partindo de uma primeira investigaÃÃo, realizamos uma anÃlise ANOVA de 129 textos, estabelecendo como variÃveis qualitativas independentes os nÃveis de proficiÃncia (B2 e C1), a lÃngua materna (RomÃnica e NÃo RomÃnica) e os diferentes tÃpicos (sobre o IndivÃduo, a Sociedade e o Meio-ambiente). Como variÃveis quantitativas dependentes, foram considerados os Ãndices de variabilidade (TTR) e diversidade lexical (MTLD). Os resultados sugerem variaÃÃes significativas nos Ãndices TTR e MTLD apenas entre as produÃÃes escritas desenvolvidas sob diferentes temas. As implicaÃÃes do estudo sÃo discutidas do ponto de vista pedagÃgico da avaliaÃÃo escrita, considerando a importÃncia da operacionalizaÃÃo de descritores de diversidade lexical como feedback, tendo em vista a dinamicidade dos nÃveis de proficiÃncia. Corroboramos com as noÃÃes de Housen e Bultà (2013) de que complexidade linguÃstica tem dimensÃes de carÃter cognitivo e linguÃstico, com facetas de desenvolvimento e desempenho, podendo se manifestar em todos os nÃveis estruturais e de uso. / The present study aims to investigate the lexical knowledge evidenced in written productions of learners of Portuguese as an additional language. Through an exploratory design, from the corpus (PLA Corpora Collection of the University of Coimbra), the developmental stages of interlanguage (IL) were investigated in an attempt to compare the lexical diversity by examining the variation of the indexes established by the tool textinspector workflow. This research is supported by lexical knowledge studies of Cobb (2003), Engber (1995), Hulstijn (1996, 2001, 2011, 2015), Laufer (1995, 1998, 2004), Meara (1980, 2005), Milton (2009), Nation (2001, 2004, 2011, 2012), Read (2004) and Jarvis (2013a, 1013b), who take written texts as potentially rich sources of information on the vocabulary development of a second or additional language. The underlying assumption is that the interlanguage (IL) stage of development of may serve as an indicator of higher proficiency along with the notion a common core use of the language in question. Departing from a first investigation, an ANOVA analysis of a sample of 139 texts was conducted, establishing as independent qualitative variables: the proficiency levels (B2 and C1), the mother tongue (Romance and non-Romance), and the different topics (on the Individual, Society and the environment). As dependent quantitative variables, the variability index (TTR) and lexical diversity (MTLD) were considered. The results suggest significant changes in TTR and MTLD indexes only between the different topics provided by the corpus. The implications of the findings are discussed from a pedagogical point of view of writing assessment, considering the importance of lexical diversity descriptors for feedback in view of the dynamics of the proficiency levels. Also, the study corroborates the notions of Housen and Bultà (2013) of linguistic complexity as having dimensions of cognitive, linguistic, performance, and developmental facets that can be found in all structural levels and use.