Complexity Mechanism in Leveled Texts

Мұқаба

Дәйексөз келтіру

Толық мәтін

Аннотация

The paper presents the research conducted to assess and contrast linguistic and cognitive complexity of primary (fiction) and secondary (leveled to teach Russian as a foreign language) texts. The research dataset comprises dataset of texts with the total amount of 22,232 tokens. Measurement of linguistic complexity performed with Rulingva (rulingva.kpfu.ru) revealed 14 statistically significant parameters discriminating the primary and secondary (leveled) texts. The parametersdiscriminators fall into three groups: morphological (the number of two-syllabic words, verbs, nouns, numerals, the average number of nouns, verbs and adverbs per sentence, ‘descriptivity’, ‘narrativity’), lexical (hapax legomena, Abstractness) and syntactic (readability, sentence length, word length in syllables or in characters). Assessment of cognitive complexity of the contrasted pairs of texts included the two-step algorithm: propositional analysis and information density measurement. The propositional analysis (by W. Kintsch) was aimed at identifying and calculating the number propositions, while the information density measurement implied normalization of the number of propositions by the length of the text (In words) followed by the contrastive analysis. The study revealed increase in the normalized information density in 7 out of 9 leveled texts and confirmed the hypothesis that though leveled texts have a lower degree of linguistic complexity they retain a higher degree of normalized information density inherent in the primary text.

Авторлар туралы

Mariia Andreeva

Kazan (Volga Region) Federal University

Хат алмасуға жауапты Автор.
Email: mariia99andreeva@yandex.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-5760-0934
SPIN-код: 9243-6995
Scopus Author ID: 57195974758
ResearcherId: ABF-7003-2020

Associate Professor, PhD in Philology, Senior Researcher of the ‘Multidisciplinary text research’ Research Lab, Institute of Philology and Intercultural Communication

18/1, Kremlevskaya st., Kazan, Russian Federation, 420008

Marina Solnyshkina

Kazan (Volga Region) Federal University

Email: mesoln@yandex.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0003-1885-3039
SPIN-код: 6480-1830
Scopus Author ID: 56429529500
ResearcherId: E-3863-2015

Dr.Sc. (Philology), Professor of the Department of Theory and Practice of Teaching Foreign Languages, Head of ‘Multidisciplinary text research’ Research Lab, Institute of Philology and Intercultural Communication

18/1, Kremlevskaya st., Kazan, Russian Federation, 420008

Sarra Saadna

RUDN University

Email: 1042218192@rudn.ru
ORCID iD: 0009-0004-3832-6660

PhD student at the Foreign languages department, Faculty of Philology

6, Miklukho-Maklaya str., Moscow, Russian Federation, 117198

Әдебиет тізімі

  1. Dascalu, M. (2023). Discourse Complexity: Driving Forces of the New Paradigm. A scientific result. Questions of Theoretical and Applied Linguistics, 9(1), 4–10. https://doi.org/10.18413/2313-8912-2023-9-1-0-1 EDN: FGGAMR
  2. Solovyev, V., Solnyshkina, M., Ivanov, V., & Timoshenko, S. (2018). Complexity of Russian Academic Texts as the Function of Syntactic Parameters. In: International Conference on Computational Linguistics and Intelligent Text Processing (pp. 168–179). Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-23793-5_15
  3. Borisova, E.G. (2021). Listener’s Grammar: Predicting the Understanding of a Coherent Text and Ways to Correct It. In: Russian Studies and Comparative Studies (pp. 262–277). Moscow: Knogodel. https://doi.org/10.25688/2619-0656.2021.15.15 (In Russ.). EDN: CDZMCP
  4. Karamnov, A.S. (2013). The Method of Expert Assessments in Linguodidactics. Vectors of well-being: economy and society, 4(10), 224–232. (In Russ.). EDN: RSWBMT
  5. Zmeeva, N.B. (2016). Ranking of Educational Texts by the Method of Expert Assessments. Problems of modern science and education, 4(46), 133–138. (In Russ.). EDN: VOGYPJ
  6. Kulibina, N.V. (2013). It is Impossible to Adapt to Understand. Principles of Adaptation of Literary Texts in Accordance with the “Pan-European Competencies of Foreign Language Proficiency”. Russian Language Abroad, 5(240), 22–30. (In Russ.). EDN: RTYEGT
  7. Yahibbayeva, L.M. (2008). Educational Text as a Special Type of Secondary Text and a Component of Educational Discourse. Bulletin of the Bashkir University, 13(4), 1029–1031. (In Russ.). EDN: JKPEAJ
  8. Dzyuba, E.V., & Tkachenko, Yu.G. (2021). An Artistic Text in an RCT Textbook: an Object of Study or a Means of Teaching? Philological Class, 26(3), 243–254. https://doi.org/10.51762/1FK-2021-26-03-21 (In Russ.). EDN: BFMAAE
  9. Simonenko, M.A., & Bagrintseva, O.B. (2019). A Propositional Approach to the Analysis of the Denotative Structure of Secondary Texts (Based on the Material of Retellings of IA Bunin’s Text “The Novel of the Hunchback”). Philological Sciences. Questions of Theory and Practice, 12(3), 310–313. https://doi.org/10.30853/filnauki.2019.3.66 (In Russ.). EDN: VVMNJM
  10. Piotrovskaya, A.A., Piotrovsky, R.G., & Razzhivin, K.A. (1962). The Entropy of the Russian Language. Voprosy Jazykoznanija, 6, 115–130. (In Russ.).
  11. Filippov, V.S. (2003). Text invariants. In: Philology and culture. Proceedings of the IV International Conference (pp. 69–72). Tambov. (In Russ.).
  12. Chernyavskaya, V.E. (2003) Discourse. In: Stylistic Encyclopedic Dictionary of the Russian language (pp. 54–55). Moscow. (In Russ.).
  13. Azimov, E.G., & Shchukin, A.N. (2009). A New Dictionary of Methodological Terms and Concepts (Theory and Practice of Language Teaching). Moscow: Ikar. (In Russ.). EDN: XQRFTT
  14. Dyakova, A.A. (2009). Secondary Representation of Textual Content During Interdiscursive Adaptation. Lingua Mobilis, 3(17), 79–88. (In Russ.). EDN: MSXYUR
  15. Barkhudarov, L.S. (1975). Language and Translation (Issues of General and Particular Theory of Translation). Moscow: International Relations. (In Russ.).
  16. Karasik, V. (1997). Types of Secondary Texts. In: Linguistic Personality: Problems of Designation And Understanding (pp. 69–70). Moscow. (In Russ.).
  17. Valgina, N.S. (2003). Text theory. Moscow: Logos. (In Russ.).
  18. Gak, V.G. (1998). Linguistic transformations. Moscow: Languages of Russian Culture. (In Russ.).
  19. Koch, V.A. (1978). A Preliminary Sketch of the Semantic Type of Discursive Analysis. In: New in Foreign Linguistics (8. pp. 149–171). Moscow: Progress. (In Russ.).
  20. Murzin, L.N., & Stern, A.S. (1991). The Text and Its Perception. Sverdlovsk: UGU publ. (In Russ.).
  21. Frumkina, R.M. (2007). Psycholinguistics. Moscow: Akademiya. (In Russ.).
  22. Morozov, D.A., Glazkova, A.V., & Iomdin, B.L. (2022). Text Complexity and Linguistic Features: Their Correlation in English and Russian. Russian Journal of Linguistics, 26(2), 426–448. https://doi.org/10.22363/2687-0088-30132 EDN: IWWUTZ
  23. Khosmood, F., & Levinson, R. (2010). Automatic Synonym and Phrase Replacement Show Promise for Style Transformation. In: 2010 Ninth International Conference on Machine Learning and Applications (pp. 958–961). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICMLA.2010.153
  24. Dascalu, M., Gutu, G., Ruseti, S., Paraschiv, I.C., Dessus, P., McNamara, D.S., … & Trausan-Matu, S. (2017). ReaderBench: A multi-lingual framework for analyzing text complexity. In: Data Driven Approaches in Digital Education: 12th European Conference on Technology Enhanced Learning, EC-TEL 2017, Tallinn, Estonia, September 12–15, 2017, Proceedings 12 (pp. 495–499). Springer International Publ.
  25. McNamara, D.S., Graesser, A.C., McCarthy, P.M., & Cai, Z. (2014). Automated Evaluation of Text And Discourse with Coh-Metrix. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  26. Solnyshkina, M.I., Kupriyanov, R.V., & Shoeva, G.N. (2024). Linguistic Profiling of Text Genres: Adventure Stories vs. Textbooks. A Research Result. Issues of Theoretical and Applied Linguistics, 10(1), 115–132. https://doi.org/10.18413/2313-8912-2024-10-1-0-7EDN: YABVVQ
  27. Churunina, A.A., Solnyshkina, M.I., & Yarmakeev, I.E. (2023). Lexical Diversity as a Predictor of the Complexity of Textbooks in the Russian Language. Russian Language Studies, 21(2), 212–227. http://doi.org/10.22363/2618-8163-2023-21-2-212-227 (In Russ.). EDN: ZYHDWM
  28. Mayer, R.V. (2020). The Problem of Determining the Didactic Complexity of Educational Texts. Scientific Notes of the Vernadsky Crimean Federal University. Sociology. Pedagogy. Psychology, 6(72)(1), 37–47. (In Russ.). EDN: UURISI
  29. Kudzh, S.A., & Tsvetkov, V.Ya. (2018). Factors of Cognitive Complexity. ITNOW: Information Technologies in Science, Education and Management, 6(10), 34–41. (In Russ.). EDN: YOYXWP
  30. Bredikhin, S.N., Serebryakova, S.V., & Likhovid, A.A. (2019). Methods of Compression of Cognitive Information in a Popular Science Text. Actual Problems of Philology and Pedagogical Linguistics, 3, 139–145. https://doi.org/10.29025/2079-6021-2019-3-139-145 (In Russ.). EDN: MAZDIA
  31. Matveeva, O.V. (2014). “Information Saturation” as a Characteristic Feature of Special Texts. Actual Problems of the Humanities and Natural Sciences, 4–1, 363–368. EDN: SDWKPL
  32. Alekseeva, I.S. (2004). Introduction to translation studies. Moscow: Academy. (In Russ.). EDN: QQZJET
  33. Tikhomirova, L.S. (2011). The Density of Text in Cognitive Consciousness. Humanitarian Studies in Eastern Siberia and the Far East, 2–14, 99–104. (In Russ.).
  34. Chen, Y.Y., Hakimi, S., Van, M., Chen, F., Hong, M., Klenk, M., & Wu, C. (2024). Understanding the Cognitive Complexity in Language Elicited by Product Images. In: arXiv preprint arXiv:2409, 16521.
  35. Chernyavskaya, V.E. (2007). Text in the Cognitive-Discursive Paradigm: on the Issue of the Graduated Nature of Textuality. Acta Linguistica Petropolitana. Proceedings of the Institute of Linguistic Research, 3(1), 303–314. (In Russ.). EDN: YUFBBR
  36. Bolton, M.L., & Biltekoff, E. & Humphrey, L. (2023). The Mathematical Meaninglessness of the NASA Task Load Index: A Level of Measurement Analysis. IEEE Transactions on Human-Machine Systems, 53(3), 590–599. https://doi.org/10.1109/thms.2023.3263482 EDN: YUQIOI
  37. Agris, A.R., Akhutina, T.V., & Korneev, A.A. (2014). Variants of Brain Block i Function Deficiency in Children with Learning Difficulties. Bulletin of the Moscow University. Episode 14. Psychology, 3, 34–46. (In Russ.). EDN: SKSFRB
  38. Webb, N.L. (2007). Issues Related to Judging the Alignment of Curriculum Standards and Assessments. Applied Measurement in Education, 20(1), 7–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/08957340709336728
  39. Anderson, L., Krathwohl, D., Airasian, P., Cruikshank, K., Mayer, R., Pintrich, P., Raths, J., & Wittrock, M. (eds.). (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives (Abridged Edition).
  40. Bloom, B.S. (Ed.). (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: Handbook II. David McKay.
  41. Samsonov, N., Chmykhova, E., & Davydov, D. (2015). Development and Approbation of the Linguistic Technique of Cognitive Complexity Assessment for the Educational Text. Psychological research, 8(41), 6. https://doi.org/10.54359/ps.v8i41.548 (In Russ.). EDN: VHFQHX
  42. Dridze, T.M. (1980). Language and social psychology. Moscow: HS. (In Russ.).
  43. Kupriyanov, R.V., Bukach, O.V., & Aleksandrova, O.I. (2023). Cognitive Complexity Measures for Educational Texts: Empirical Validation of Linguistic Parameters. Russian Journal of Linguistics, 27(3), 641–662. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.22363/2687-0088-35817 EDN: NAZBGA
  44. Das, S., Das Mandal, S.K., & Basu, A. (2020). Cognitive Complexity Analysis of Learning-Related Texts: a Case Study on School Textbooks. In Methodologies and Intelligent Systems for Technology Enhanced Learning, 10th International Conference (pp. 74–84). Springer International Publ. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-52538-5_9 EDN: HKOTPP
  45. Kintsch, W., & van Dijk, T.A. (1978). Toward a Model of Text Comprehension and Production. Psychological Review, 85(5), 363–394. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.85.5.363
  46. Graesser, A. & McNamara, D. (2011). Computational Analyses of Multilevel Discourse Comprehension. Topics in Cognitive Science, 3, 371398. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1756- 8765.2010.01081
  47. Solnyshkina, M.I., Harkov, E.V., & Ebzeeva, Yu.N. (2023). The Influence of Content on the Understanding of a Text: a Propositional Analysis of Discourse. Russian Journal of Linguistics, 27(4), 938–956. https://doi.org 10.22363/2687-0088-35915 (In Russ.). EDN: ZAJKUE
  48. Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  49. Kintsch, W. (1974). The Representation of Meaning in Memory. Poiomac: Erlbaum.
  50. Thorndyke, P.W. (1977). Cognitive Structures in Comprehension and Memory of Narrative Discourse. Cognitive Psychology, 9(1), 77–110.
  51. Anderson, J.A. (1990). Cognitive Psychology and Its Implications. N.Y.: W.H. Freeman. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(77)90005-6
  52. Biryukova, Yu.N. (2014). Types of Reading in Teaching Translation of Scientific and Technical Texts. Multilingualism and Transcultural Practices, 2, 103–109. (In Russ.). EDN: SFGYNN
  53. Folomkina, S.K. (1987). Teaching Reading in a Foreign Language in a Non-Linguistic University. Moscow. (In Russ.).
  54. Oborneva, I.V. (2006). Automated Assessment of the Complexity of Educational Texts Based on Statistical Parameters [PhD thesis]. Moscow. (In Russ.). EDN: NNRVKP
  55. Bondareva, E.V., & Mazepa, E.A. (2021). On the Use of the Wilcoxon Criterion in the Practice of Pedagogical Research. Mathematical Physics and Computer Modeling, 24(3), 26–32. https://doi.org/10.15688/mpcm.jvolsu.2021.3.3 (In Russ.). EDN: EXNRKA
  56. Starodumova, E.A. (2005). Syntax of the Modern Russian Language. Vladivostok: Far Eastern Federal University. (In Russ.). EDN: GWUTOY
  57. Zaki, H., & Ellis, R. (1999). Learning Vocabulary through Interacting with a Written Text. In: Ellis, R. (ed), Learning a Second Language through Interaction (pp. 153–169). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/sibil.17.10zak
  58. Rod, E. & Barkhuizen, G. (2005). Analysing Learner Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  59. Andreeva, M.I., Solnyshkina, M.I., Mufazalova, N.I. (2024). Predictors of Cognitive and Linguistic Complexity of RCT Texts. In: New and traditional aspects in the multicultural space of teaching RCT: current issues of theory and practice: Collection of materials of the VII Moscow International Cultural and Educational Forum on RFL. November 21–22, 2024 (pp. 117–1125). Moscow: UCR MSU. (In Russ.).
  60. Verbitskaya, M.V. (2000). Theory of Secondary Texts: Based on the Material of Modern English [Doctor of Philology thesis]. Moscow. (In Russ.). EDN: ZKUIDX

Қосымша файлдар

Қосымша файлдар
Әрекет
1. JATS XML
Жүктеу

Согласие на обработку персональных данных с помощью сервиса «Яндекс.Метрика»

1. Я (далее – «Пользователь» или «Субъект персональных данных»), осуществляя использование сайта https://journals.rcsi.science/ (далее – «Сайт»), подтверждая свою полную дееспособность даю согласие на обработку персональных данных с использованием средств автоматизации Оператору - федеральному государственному бюджетному учреждению «Российский центр научной информации» (РЦНИ), далее – «Оператор», расположенному по адресу: 119991, г. Москва, Ленинский просп., д.32А, со следующими условиями.

2. Категории обрабатываемых данных: файлы «cookies» (куки-файлы). Файлы «cookie» – это небольшой текстовый файл, который веб-сервер может хранить в браузере Пользователя. Данные файлы веб-сервер загружает на устройство Пользователя при посещении им Сайта. При каждом следующем посещении Пользователем Сайта «cookie» файлы отправляются на Сайт Оператора. Данные файлы позволяют Сайту распознавать устройство Пользователя. Содержимое такого файла может как относиться, так и не относиться к персональным данным, в зависимости от того, содержит ли такой файл персональные данные или содержит обезличенные технические данные.

3. Цель обработки персональных данных: анализ пользовательской активности с помощью сервиса «Яндекс.Метрика».

4. Категории субъектов персональных данных: все Пользователи Сайта, которые дали согласие на обработку файлов «cookie».

5. Способы обработки: сбор, запись, систематизация, накопление, хранение, уточнение (обновление, изменение), извлечение, использование, передача (доступ, предоставление), блокирование, удаление, уничтожение персональных данных.

6. Срок обработки и хранения: до получения от Субъекта персональных данных требования о прекращении обработки/отзыва согласия.

7. Способ отзыва: заявление об отзыве в письменном виде путём его направления на адрес электронной почты Оператора: info@rcsi.science или путем письменного обращения по юридическому адресу: 119991, г. Москва, Ленинский просп., д.32А

8. Субъект персональных данных вправе запретить своему оборудованию прием этих данных или ограничить прием этих данных. При отказе от получения таких данных или при ограничении приема данных некоторые функции Сайта могут работать некорректно. Субъект персональных данных обязуется сам настроить свое оборудование таким способом, чтобы оно обеспечивало адекватный его желаниям режим работы и уровень защиты данных файлов «cookie», Оператор не предоставляет технологических и правовых консультаций на темы подобного характера.

9. Порядок уничтожения персональных данных при достижении цели их обработки или при наступлении иных законных оснований определяется Оператором в соответствии с законодательством Российской Федерации.

10. Я согласен/согласна квалифицировать в качестве своей простой электронной подписи под настоящим Согласием и под Политикой обработки персональных данных выполнение мною следующего действия на сайте: https://journals.rcsi.science/ нажатие мною на интерфейсе с текстом: «Сайт использует сервис «Яндекс.Метрика» (который использует файлы «cookie») на элемент с текстом «Принять и продолжить».