Syntactic analysis between spoken and written language: A case study on a senior high student’s lexical density

Joneth D. Vibar

doi:10.63529/ajpe.v3i1.7665

Authors

Joneth D. Vibar Dela Paz National High School

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.63529/ajpe.v3i1.7665

Keywords:

Lexical Density, Spoken, Written Language, Syntactic Structure

Abstract

Exploring the syntactic features of spoken and written language helps determine the composition of words and phrases to create meaningful and well-constructed sentences for language discourse. This study analyzes and compares the spoken and written reflections of the participant to understand her language density which can describe the relationship between linguistic elements that occurred within the sentences. It is revealed that spoken and written language have lesser density because of the excessive repetition of functional words during the participant’s language use. In addition, the dynamic use of language during the spoken activity contributed to the formation of wordiness and overuse of lesser lexical items within sentences. With writing, the learner often tries to use complete sentences when developing written narratives; however, run-on sentences or fragments are also evident. Understanding the differences between spoken and language discourse through the lexical aspect of speech allows educators to decide on appropriate language approaches that learners encounter with difficulties. The study further suggested a similar study to understand more the complexity of language systems used in both discourses to support the findings in this study.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

Joneth D. Vibar, Dela Paz National High School

Joneth D. Vibar is currently a Senior High School Teacher who handles language and literature subjects in Academic Track for both GAS and ABM Strands. She holds a Master Teacher II position in DepEd whose responsibility includes assisting the school in instructional monitoring and providing technical assistance to colleagues. She takes part in project development and programs of the schools to continuously improve the curriculum and its delivery. She is currently one of the lead researchers in her institution specializing in language studies and action researches through qualitative and quantitative methodologies.

To further keep abreast with the current trends in education, she is presently taking Doctor of Education major in Literature and Language Education at Far Easter University – Manila Campus. This is aligned with her Master of Arts in Teaching Degree major in English Language Arts which she took in Philippine Normal University in 2009.

References

Bakar, Y.A. and Ishak, N.M. (2013). Developing Sampling Frame for Case Study: Challenges and Conditions. World Journal of Education. 4(3). https://www.sciedu.ca/wje. https://doi:10.5430/wje.v4n3p29.

Bryman, A. (2012). Social Research Methods (4th ed.) New York: Oxford University Press

Burns, A. (2016). Functional Approaches to Teaching English Grammar to Speakers of other languages. Research Gate. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/ 303939477

Creswell, J. W. (2013). Research Design: Qualitative and Mixed Methods Approaches. London: SAGE.

Dulay, H.C. Burt, M.K. and Krashen, S. (1982). Language Two. New York: Oxford University Press.

Esser, F. and Vliegenthart, R. (2017). Comparative Research Methods. The International Encyclopedia of Communication Research Method (General Edition). John Wiley and Sons, Inc. https://DOI:10.1002/9781118901731.

Graddol D. and Boyd-Barret, O. (1994). Media Text: Authors and Readers. Multi-Media Matter. Open University.

Gregori-Signesa, C. and Clavel-Arroitiab, B. (2015). Analyzing lexical density and lexical diversity in university students’ written discourse. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences (198) 546 – 556. https://www.sciencedirect.com

Halliday, M. A. K. (1985). Spoken and written language. Geelong, Australia: Deakin University

Press.

Halliday, Michael A.K. (1985) Spoken and Written Language. Geelong, Vic.: Deakin University Press.

Halliday, M.A.K. (1989). Spoken and Written Language. Oxford University Press.

Halliday, M. A. K. (1996). Literacy and linguistics: A functional perspective. In R. Hasan & G. Williams (Eds.), Literacy in society (pp. 339-376). London: Longman.

Horowitz, R & Samuels, S. (1987). Comprehending oral and written language. Bingley, England: Emerald Group.

Johansson, V. (2008), Lexical diversity and lexical density in speech and writing: a developmental perspective. Lund University, Dept. of Linguistics and Phonetics Working Papers 53 (2008), 61

Kagan, D. M. (1980). Run-on and Fragment Sentences: An Error Analysis. Research in the Teaching of English. Vol. 14, No. 2, pp. 127-138. National Council of Teachers of English. https://www.jstor.org/stable/40170846

Khansir, A. A. (2012). Error Analysis and Second Language Acquisition. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 2(5) pp. 1027-1032, ISSN 1799-2591. Academy Publisher Manufactured in Finland. https://doi:10.4304/tpls.2.5.1027-1032

Levis, J., Jewis, G.M. and Slater, T. (2012). Written English into spoken: A functional discourse analysis of American, Indian, and Chinese TA presentations. Working Theories for Teaching Assistant Development

Lee, B. (2019). An Analysis on Lexical Density and Sophistication in Korean Learners’ Spoken Language. Volume 5 Issue 3, pp. 120-132 PEOPLE: International Journal of Social Sciences. ISSN 2454-5899. https://dx.doi.org/10.20319/pijss.2019.53.120132

Medelyan, A. (2019). Coding Qualitative Data: How to Coded Qualitative Research. https://www.getthematic.com.

Neuman, W.L. (2009). Social research methods: Qualitative and quantitative approaches (7th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson/Allyn & Bacon.

Norquist, R. (2019). Overview of Systemic Functional Linguistics. ThoughtCo. https://www.thoughtco.com/systemic-functional-linguistics-1692022

Paradis, J. (2012). Cross-linguistic influence and code-switching. In B. A. E. Goldstein (Ed), Bilingual Language Development and Disorders in Spanish-English Speakers. Second Edition (pp.73-91). Baltimore, MD: Brookes Publishing Company.

Polit, D. F., & Beck. C. T. (2012). Nursing Research: Generating and Assessing Evidence for Nursing Practice (9th Edition). China: Wolters Kluwer Health, Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. ISBN 978-1-60547-708-4.

Qualitative Data Transcription and Translation. IRC Research Toolkit. International Rescue Committee. https://www.alnap.org.

Rachel, (2009). Difference Between Written and Spoken language. DifferenceBetween.net.http://www.differencebetween.net/language/difference-between-written-and-spoken-language

Ramadhan, M.R. (2017). Lexical Density and Grammatical Intricacy in Written and Spoken Text. Unpublished Material. University of Sumatera Utara, Medan.

Richards, J.C. (1971). A Non- Contrastive Approach to Error Analysis. Journal of ELT. 25, 204-219

Salvador, J.R. (2016). Exploring Quantitative and Qualitative Methodologies: A guide to Novice Nursing Researchers. European Scientific Journal. 12(18) ISSN: 1857-7881. https://Doi:10.19044/esk.2016.v12nn18p107.

Syarif, H. (2018). Lexical Density vs Grammatical Intricacy: How are they related? Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research, Volume 276. Atlantic Press, Indonesia.

Thanh, N. C. (2015). The Differences between Spoken and Written Grammar in English, in Comparison with Vietnamese. Gist Education and Learning Research Journal. ISSN 1692-5777. 1,138-153

Ure, J. (1971). Lexical density and register differentiation. Applications of linguistics,

443-452.