Article Sidebar

Submitted
January 27, 2025
Accepted
April 15, 2025
Published
April 16, 2025
Download
PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 72 Download : 44

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Main Article Content

Abstract

This study explored the evolving  research landscape on complex word formation within contemporary syntactic frameworks using a scientometric approach. Employing bibliographic data of 350 journal articles (2014 – 2024) retrieved from Scopus, the study examined publication trends, author productivity, and prominent publication avenues, utilizing VOSviewer for data visualization and network analysis. Findings revealed a growing body of literature, with an average of 34 publications annually and a notable increase in recent years. Verspoor and Culbertson emerged as the leading authors within this research focus, while Lingua and Languages were identified as the most prominent journal publishers. Keyword co-occurrence analysis revealed ten thematic clusters, highlighting the nature of this research domain. Two main clusters, “word constructions” (20.4%) and “syntax” (18.5%), dominated the landscape, followed by four intermediate clusters focusing on “compounds” (15.7%), “artificial intelligence” (14.85), “syntactic complexity” (10.2%), and “verb” (6.5%). Four minor clusters explored more specialized themes such as “speech perception and recursion” (4.6%), “syntactic processing and sentence comprehension” (3.7%), “syntax, semantics, and information structure” (3.7%), and “sign language and language evolution” (1.9%). These findings, to a certain extent, offer implications for grammar pedagogy, emphasizing the need for teaching approaches that reflect the interconnected nature of complex word formation.

Keywords

Complex word formation Syntax Grammar pedagogy Scientometrics

Article Details

License

Copyright (c) 2025 Danang Satria Nugraha

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Authors who publish in this journal agree with the following terms:

  1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
  2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
  3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
  4. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
How to Cite
Nugraha, D. S. (2025). Complex word formation in contemporary syntactic frameworks: scientometric investigation and its relevance to grammar pedagogy. JOALL (Journal of Applied Linguistics and Literature), 10(1), 283–315. https://doi.org/10.33369/joall.v10i1.40034
Download Citation
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
BibTeX

References

  1. Adamou, E., Feltgen, Q., & Padure, C. (2021). A unified approach to the study of language contact: Cross-language priming and change in adjective/noun order. International Journal of Bilingualism, 25(6), 1635–1654. https://doi.org/10.1177/13670069211033909
  2. Adams, V. (2014). Complex words in english. In Complex Words in English. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315843339
  3. Aikhenvald, A. Y., Dixon, R. M. W., & White, N. M. (2020). The essence of ‘word.’ In Phonological Word and Grammatical Word: A Cross-Linguistic Typology. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198865681.003.0001
  4. Al-Dala’ien, O. A., Al-Daher, Z., Al-Rousan, M., Al-Shboul, Y., & Zabadi, M. I. (2022). Morphology of COVID-19 Neologisms in Modern Standard Arabic. Eurasian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 8(1), 111–132. https://doi.org/10.32601/ejal.911523
  5. Allaithy, A., Zaki, M., Khaldi, B., & Al-Kaisi, M. (2025). Linguistic hegemony in academia: The impact of English on Arabic scholarship. Language Problems and Language Planning. https://doi.org/10.1075/lplp.24014.all
  6. Anderson, S. R., & de Saussure, L. (2018). René de Saussure and the theory of word formation. In René de Saussure and the theory of word formation. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1306472
  7. Bamshadi, P., & Ardakani, N. D. (2020). A constructional cognitive approach to the persian suffix ‘-ɑr.’ Language Related Research, 11(4), 735.
  8. Beavers, J., Everdell, M., Jerro, K., Kauhanen, H., Koontz-Garboden, A., Lebovidge, E., & Nichols, S. (2021). States and Changes of State: a Crosslinguistic Study of the Roots of Verbal Meaning. Language, 97(3), 439–484. https://doi.org/10.1353/LAN.2021.0044
  9. Beraldo, R. L., & Araújo-Adriano, P. Â. (2024). What lexical acquisition has to say about a non-lexicalist architecture of grammar – and vice-versa. Isogloss, 10(6). https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/isogloss.460
  10. Blevins, J. P. (2016). Word and Paradigm Morphology. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199593545.001.0001
  11. Booij, G. (2017). Inheritance and motivation in construction morphology. In Defaults in Morphological Theory. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198712329.003.0002
  12. Booij, G. (2020). Principles of word formation. In The Cambridge Handbook of Germanic Linguistics. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108378291.012
  13. Brimo, D., Nallamala, K., & Werfel, K. L. (2023). Writing Errors of Children with Developmental Language Disorder. Topics in Language Disorders, 43(4), 302–316. https://doi.org/10.1097/TLD.0000000000000326
  14. Bundgaard-Nielsen, R. L., & Baker, B. J. (2020). Pause acceptability indicates word-internal structure in Wubuy. Cognition, 198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2019.104167
  15. Cabezas-García, M., & Chambó, S. (2021). Multi-word term variation: Prepositional and adjectival complex nominals in Spanish | La variación en los términos compuestos: Compuestos nominales preposicionales y adjetivales en español. Revista Espanola de Linguistica Aplicada, 34(2), 402–434. https://doi.org/10.1075/resla.19012.cab
  16. Carston, R. (2022). Words: Syntactic structures and pragmatic meanings. Synthese, 200(6), 430. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-022-03861-1
  17. Chomsky, N. (2004). The generative enterprise revisited. In The Generative Enterprise Revisited. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110902440
  18. Chomsky, N. (2021). Simplicity and the form of grammars. Journal of Language Modelling, 9(1), 5–15. https://doi.org/10.15398/jlm.v9i1.257
  19. Cinková, S., Plecháč, P., & Popel, M. (2024). Rhymes and Syntax: A Morpho-Syntactic Analysis of Czech Poetry | Rime in skladnja: oblikoskladenjska analiza češke poezije. Primerjalna Knjizevnost, 47(2), 65–88. https://doi.org/10.3986/pkn.v47.i2.04
  20. Cipriani, E. (2021). On Chomsky’s notion of explanatory adequacy. Language and Linguistics Compass, 15(11). https://doi.org/10.1111/lnc3.12441
  21. Clahsen, H., & Jessen, A. (2020). Variability and its limits in bilingual word recognition: A morphological priming study. Mental Lexicon, 15(2), 295–329. https://doi.org/10.1075/ml.20013.cla
  22. da Cunha Silva, A. L., de Sá, T. M., Diniz, R. S., Ferreira, S. B. L., Siqueira, S. W. M., & Bourguignon, S. C. (2023). Prescriptive and Semantic Analysis of an Automatic Sign Language Translation: Cases on VLibras Avatar Translation Using Video Interviews and Textual Interactions With a Chatbot. Interacting with Computers, 35(2), 231–246. https://doi.org/10.1093/iwc/iwac020
  23. Davidse, K., & Brems, L. (2023). English type noun-constructions with lexical functions: A new functional-structural typology. In Type Noun Constructions in Slavic, Germanic and Romance Languages: Semantics and Pragmatics on the Move. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110701104-003
  24. de Swart, H., Tellings, J., & Wälchli, B. (2022). Not… Until across European Languages: A Parallel Corpus Study. Languages, 7(1). https://doi.org/10.3390/languages7010056
  25. DeVore, S., & Verspoor, M. (2024). Network science in a dynamic usage-based approach. Research Methods in Applied Linguistics, 3(3). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rmal.2024.100150
  26. Ellis, R. (2015). Form-focused approaches to learning, teaching, and researching grammar. In Teaching and Learning English Grammar: Research Findings and Future Directions. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315719016
  27. Ellis, R. (2021). A short history of sla: Where have we come from and where are we going? Language Teaching, 54(2), 190–205. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444820000038
  28. Embick, D. (2013). Morphemes and Morphophonological Loci. In Distributed Morphology Today (pp. 151–166). The MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/9701.003.0011
  29. Fedorenko, E., Blank, I. A., Siegelman, M., & Mineroff, Z. (2020). Lack of selectivity for syntax relative to word meanings throughout the language network. Cognition, 203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2020.104348
  30. Fendel, V. B. (2024). Celebrating diversity: The origins and pathways of three support-verb constructions. Lexis - Journal in English Lexicology, 24. https://doi.org/10.4000/12cvp
  31. Garbo, F. D., Olsson, B., & Wälchli, B. (2019). Grammatical Gender and Linguistic Complexity. In Grammatical Gender and Linguistic Complexity (Vol. 1). https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3446224
  32. Gibson, H., & Marten, L. (2019). Probing the interaction of language contact and internal innovation: Four case studies of morphosyntactic change in rangi*. Studies in African Linguistics, 48(1), 63–92. https://doi.org/10.32473/sal.v48i1.114932
  33. Gorman, R. (2022). Universal Dependencies and Author Attribution of Short Texts with Syntax Alone. Digital Humanities Quarterly, 16(2).
  34. Günther, F., & Marelli, M. (2023). CAOSS and transcendence: Modeling role-dependent constituent meanings in compounds. Morphology, 33(4), 409–432. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11525-021-09386-6
  35. Hall-Mills, S., & Wood, C. (2023). Complex Syntax Production in Informational Writing by Students with Language Impairment from Diverse Linguistic Backgrounds. Topics in Language Disorders, 43(4), 333–348. https://doi.org/10.1097/TLD.0000000000000325
  36. Harley, H. (2014). On the Identity of Roots. Theoretical Linguistics, 40(3–4), 225–276. https://doi.org/10.1515/tl-2014-0010
  37. Hathout, N., & Namer, F. (2019). Paradigms in word formation: what are we up to? Morphology. https://doi.org/10.1007/S11525-019-09344-3
  38. Heine, B., Narrog, H., & Long, H. (2016). Constructional change vs. grammaticalization: From compounding to derivation. Studies in Language, 40(1), 137–175. https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.40.1.05hei
  39. Hood, W. W., & Wilson, C. S. (2001). The literature of bibliometrics, scientometrics, and informetrics. Scientometrics, 52(2), 291–314. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1017919924342
  40. Hopp, H. (2016). The timing of lexical and syntactic processes in second language sentence comprehension. Applied Psycholinguistics, 37(5), 1253–1280. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716415000569
  41. Hopp, H., Schimke, S., Gastmann, F., Öwerdieck, D., & Poarch, G. J. (2024). Processing to learn noncanonical word orders: Exploring linguistic and cognitive predictors of reanalysis in early L2 sentence comprehension. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 46(3), 686–709. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263123000451
  42. Horsch, J. (2021). Slovak comparative correlatives A usage-based construction grammar account. Constructions and Frames, 13(2), 193–229. https://doi.org/10.1075/cf.00051.hor
  43. Hsieh, C.-N. (2024). The Role of Task Types and Reading Proficiency on Young English as a Foreign Language Learners’ Writing Performances. TESOL Quarterly, 58(2), 978–990. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.3286
  44. Hüning, M., & Booij, G. (2014). From compounding to derivation the emergence of derivational affixes through “constructionalization.” Folia Linguistica, 48(2), 579–604. https://doi.org/10.1515/flin.2014.019
  45. Hyland, K. (2016). Academic publishing and the myth of linguistic injustice. Journal of Second Language Writing, 31, 58–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2016.01.005
  46. Jansen, W. (2016). Derivation in the lexicon: The case of Esperanto. Linguistics, 54(5), 1101–1133. https://doi.org/10.1515/ling-2016-0024
  47. Jorroch, A., & Prawdzic-Jankowska, I. (2024). Corpus Linguistics meets Contact Linguistics and Sociolinguistics: multimodal German–Polish digital linguistic corpus. Corpora, 19(3), 375–394. https://doi.org/10.3366/cor.2024.0319
  48. Jurado, A. B. (2019). A study on the “wordgasm”: the nature of blends’ splinters. Lexis - Journal in English Lexicology, 14. https://doi.org/10.4000/LEXIS.3916
  49. Khezrlou, S., & Ellis, R. (2017). Effects of computer-assisted glosses on EFL learners’ vocabulary acquisition and reading comprehension in three learning conditions. System, 65, 104–116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2017.01.009
  50. Kim, M. (2021). Exploring longitudinal changes in lexical and syntactic features in beginning-level EFL learner writing. System, 103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2021.102680
  51. Kolbusz-Buda, J. (2024). Between compounding and phrasal derivation: Polish complex nouns in sam(o)-. Word Structure, 17(3), 112–133. https://doi.org/10.3366/word.2024.0240
  52. Körtvélyessy, L., & Štekauer, P. (2020). Complex Words: Advances in Morphology. In Complex Words: Advances in Morphology. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780643
  53. 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. https://doi.org/10.22363/2687-0088-35817
  54. Larsen-Freeman, D. (2010). Not so fast: A discussion of l2 morpheme processing and acquisition. Language Learning, 60(1), 221–230. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2009.00556.x
  55. Larsen-Freeman, D. (2015a). Research into practice: Grammar learning and teaching. Language Teaching, 48(2), 263–280. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444814000408
  56. Larsen-Freeman, D. (2015b). Saying what we mean: Making a case for ‘language acquisition’ to become ‘language development.’ Language Teaching, 48(4), 491–505. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444814000019
  57. Larsen-Freeman, D., Wen, Z., & Mohebbi, H. (2024). The Past and the Future of Language Learning and Teaching: An Interview with Diane Larsen-Freeman. Language Teaching Research Quarterly, 39, 7–17. https://doi.org/10.32038/ltrq.2024.39.02
  58. Lenhart, M. H., Timler, G. R., Pavelko, S. L., Bronaugh, D. A., & Dudding, C. C. (2022). Syntactic Complexity Across Language Sampling Contexts in School-Age Children, Ages 8–11 Years. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 53(4), 1168–1176. https://doi.org/10.1044/2022_LSHSS-21-00187
  59. Lieber, R. (2006). Syntax of Words. In Encyclopedia of Language & Linguistics (pp. 405–408). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B0-08-044854-2/00144-9
  60. Lieber, R., & Plag, I. (2022). The semantics of conversion nouns and -ing nominalizations: A quantitative and theoretical perspective. Journal of Linguistics, 58(2), 307–343. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226721000311
  61. Lieber, R., Štekauer, P., & Štekauer, P. (2015). Derivational Paradigms. The Oxford Handbook of Derivational Morphology. https://doi.org/10.1093/OXFORDHB/9780199641642.013.0020
  62. Lüdi, G. (2015). Monolingualism and multilingualism in the construction and dissemination of scientific knowledge. In The Multilingual Challenge: Cross-Disciplinary Perspectives. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781614512165-011
  63. Lun, W. W., Muhammad, M. M., Mihat, W., Shak, M. S. Y., Rahman, M. A., & Prihantoro. (2023). Vocabulary Index as a Sustainable Resource for Teaching Extended Writing in the Post-Pandemic Era. World Journal of English Language, 13(3), 181–192. https://doi.org/10.5430/wjel.v13n3p181
  64. Mansfield, J. (2021). The word as a unit of internal predictability. Linguistics, 59(6), 1427–1472. https://doi.org/10.1515/ling-2020-0118
  65. Marco, M. W.-D., & Fraser, A. (2020). Modeling word formation in english-German neural machine translation. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, 4227–4232.
  66. Mifka-Profozic, N., O’Reilly, D., & Lovrovic, L. (2024). Unpacking L2 explicit linguistic knowledge and online processing of the English modals may and can: A comparison of acceptability judgments and self-paced reading. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 46(3), 741–768. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263123000475
  67. Monaghan, P., Ruiz, S., & Rebuschat, P. (2021). The role of feedback and instruction on the cross-situational learning of vocabulary and morphosyntax: Mixed effects models reveal local and global effects on acquisition. Second Language Research, 37(2), 261–289. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267658320927741
  68. Murphy, E. R. (2023). Dealing with inverse translation: Word order in Spanish L1-English L2 translated Texts. Moderna Sprak, 117(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.58221/mosp.v117i1.12859
  69. Nomvete, P., & Easterbrooks, S. R. (2020). Phrase-Reading Mediates Between Words and Syntax in Struggling Adolescent Readers. Communication Disorders Quarterly, 41(3), 162–175. https://doi.org/10.1177/1525740119825616
  70. Nugraha, D. S. (2024a). A Morphological Analysis of the Indonesian Suffixation: A Look at the Different Types of Affixes and Their Semantic Changes. GEMA Online® Journal of Language Studies, 24(4), 109–132. https://doi.org/10.17576/gema-2024-2404-07
  71. Nugraha, D. S. (2024b). Analyzing Prefix /me(N)-/ in the Indonesian Affixation: A Corpus-Based Morphology. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 14(6), 1697–1711. https://doi.org/10.17507/tpls.1406.10
  72. Nugraha, D. S. (2024c). A Corpus-Based Study of Memberi ‘Give’ Light Verb Constructions. International Journal of Society, Culture and Language, 12(2), 104–120. https://doi.org/10.22034/ijscl.2024.2023112.3389
  73. Nugraha, D. S., & Vincze, V. (2024). Towards an Empirical Understanding of membawa ‘bring’: Corpus Insights into Indonesian Light Verb Constructions. JURNAL ARBITRER, 11(3), 278–296. https://doi.org/10.25077/ar.11.3.278-296.2024
  74. Panahi, A., Mohebbi, H., & Larsen-Freeman, D. (2024). Diane Larsen-Freeman’s Fifty-Year Contributions to Language Learning and Teaching: A Systematic Review and Diane Larsen-Freeman’s Personal Reflection. Language Teaching Research Quarterly, 39, 372–425. https://doi.org/10.32038/ltrq.2024.39.23
  75. Plag, I. (2019). Word-Formation in English, Second Edition. In Word-Formation in Englis,: Second Edition. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316771402
  76. Plag, I. (2020). Productivity and the Mental Lexicon. In Language in Use: A Reader.
  77. Pustejovsky, J. ., & Batiukova, O. (2019). Lexicon in Syntactic Frameworks. In The Lexicon (pp. 49–92). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9780511982378.004
  78. Rice, S. (2023). Lexicalization and lexical meaning. In The Languages and Linguistics of Indigenous North America: A Comprehensive Guide, Vol 1. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110600926-019
  79. Savoia, L. M., & Baldi, B. (2022). Root, Thematic Vowels and Inflectional Exponents in Verbs: A Morpho-Syntactic Analysis. Languages, 7(2). https://doi.org/10.3390/languages7020104
  80. Schmid, H.-J. (2015). Morphology. In Exploring Language and Linguistics. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139548922.005
  81. Schnur, T. T., & Wang, S. (2024). Differences in Connected Speech Outcomes Across Elicitation Methods. Aphasiology, 38(5), 816–837. https://doi.org/10.1080/02687038.2023.2239509
  82. Shih, C.-L. (2022). Pre-Editing and Machine Translation: Developing Marine English Reading Materials. Compilation and Translation Review, 15(2), 123–158. https://doi.org/10.29912/CTR.202209_15(2).0004
  83. Spencer, J., Kahraman, H., & Beyersmann, E. (2023). Positional Encoding of Morphemes in Visual Word Recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition, 50(5), 712–739. https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0001296
  84. Štekauer, P. (2015). The delimitation of derivation and inflection. In Word-Formation (pp. 218–235). DE GRUYTER. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110246254-016
  85. Stekauer, P., Valera, S., & Körtvélyessy, L. (2012). Word-Formation in the world’s languages: A typological survey. Word-Formation In The World’s Languages A Typological Survey, 1–366. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511895005
  86. Sun, H., & Verspoor, M. (2022). Mandarin vocabulary growth, teacher qualifications and teacher talk in child heritage language learners. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 25(6), 1976–1991. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2020.1835813
  87. Tat, D. (2022). Lexical Borrowing Targets Spans. Languages, 7(4). https://doi.org/10.3390/languages7040289
  88. Taylor, J. R. (2015). Word-formation in cognitive grammar. Word-Formation: An International Handbook of the Languages of Europe, 1, 145–158. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110246254-012/HTML
  89. Tskhovrebov, A. S., & Shamonina, G. N. (2023). Syntactic features of Russian speech of two generations of bilinguals and monolinguals: a complex sentence. Russian Language Studies, 21(3), 293–305. https://doi.org/10.22363/2618-8163-2023-21-3-293-305
  90. Ullrich, J. (2020). Complex predicates with nouns and stative verbs in lakota: A role and reference grammar analysis. International Journal of American Linguistics, 86(3), 407–446. https://doi.org/10.1086/708833
  91. Uzun, K. (2021). Performance prediction strengths of noun and verb phrases in L2 writing: Comparison of density and complexity variables. Assessing Writing, 50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2021.100572
  92. van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2010). Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics, 84(2), 523–538. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-0146-3
  93. van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2023). VOSviewer (1.6.20). Universiteit Leiden.
  94. Verspoor, M. (2024). English articles: A cognitive linguistic lesson. In Explorations into Language, Literature and Culture: Studies in Honour of Martin Puetz.
  95. Vinyar, A. I. (2024). Verb-verb compounds: Delimiting the concept and approaching the study of ordering principles. Acta Linguistica Petropolitana, 20(2), 408–447. https://doi.org/10.30842/alp23065737202408447
  96. Vogelzang, M., Thiel, C. M., Rosemann, S., Rieger, J. W., & Ruigendijk, E. (2020). Neural Mechanisms Underlying the Processing of Complex Sentences: An fMRI Study. Neurobiology of Language, 1(2), 226–248. https://doi.org/10.1162/nol_a_00011
  97. Wälchli, B. (2015). Co-compounds. In Word-Formation: An International Handbook of the Languages of Europe (Vol. 1). https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110246254-042
  98. Wälchli, B. (2018). “As long as”, “until” and “before” clauses: Zooming in on linguistic diversity. Baltic Linguistics, 9, 141–236. https://doi.org/10.32798/bl.372
  99. Wang, H., Wang, G., Wang, N., & Wang, L. (2024). Effects of speaker types and L1 backgrounds on the linguistic complexity of learners’ writing. International Journal of Applied Linguistics (United Kingdom), 34(2), 692–708. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijal.12526
  100. Wang, Z., Jabar, M. A. A., & Jalis, F. M. M. (2024). Cross-Disciplinary Analysis of the Syntactic and Lexical Features of Chinese Master Thesis Titles. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 14(9), 2760–2772. https://doi.org/10.17507/tpls.1409.12
  101. Xu, J., & Li, J. (2021). A syntactic complexity analysis of translational English across genres. Across Languages and Cultures, 22(2), 214–232. https://doi.org/10.1556/084.2021.00015
  102. Yanaprasart, P. (2020). Language of knowledge and knowledge of language. Towards plurilingual sciences? European Journal of Higher Education, 10(3), 257–275. https://doi.org/10.1080/21568235.2020.1777450
  103. Yanaprasart, P., & Lüdi, G. (2018). Diversity and multilingual challenges in academic settings. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 21(7), 825–840. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2017.1308311
  104. Yang, Y., Yim, D., & Sung, J. E. (2024). Detection of Vocabulary Delay through Syntactic Complexity in Sentence Comprehension | 문장이해과제에서 구문적 복잡성을 통한 어휘발달지연 탐색. Communication Sciences and Disorders, 29(3), 592–603. https://doi.org/10.12963/CSD.240025
  105. Zhukova, V., & Janda, L. A. (2024). Russian grammar as a constructicon: beyond a list. Russian Linguistics, 48(1). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11185-024-09298-z
  106. Zukoff, S. (2023). The Mirror Alignment Principle: Morpheme ordering at the morphosyntax-phonology interface. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 41(1), 399–458. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-022-09537-2