In the evolving landscape of higher education, the mastery of academic writing remains a formidable milestone for learners across language backgrounds. A recent study conducted by Siu, Afzaal, Saleh Aldayel, and colleagues offers an illuminating investigation into the intricate nature of grammatical complexity as it manifests in the writings of both native English speakers and second language (L2) learners, with a unique focus on engineering students who are non-English majors. This research not only advances our understanding of linguistic development among academic writers but also challenges pedagogical norms by unraveling the nuanced relationship between language proficiency and disciplinary demands.
The cornerstone of this inquiry lies in the concept of grammatical complexity, a multi-faceted construct that captures the sophistication and structural intricacy of written language. Drawing upon Biber et al.’s extensive framework, the researchers examine three discrete stages of grammatical complexity, ranging from simpler to more advanced syntactic forms. Their comparative approach scrutinizes how these stages distribute across texts generated by native speakers and L2 writers at varying proficiency levels, revealing marked distinctions that correlate strongly with the writers’ language backgrounds and academic maturation.
One striking finding emerges from the distribution patterns: native English-speaking writers predominantly employ Stage 2 grammatical structures, characterized by moderate complexity including nominalizations and coordinated clauses. In contrast, L2 students, particularly those of lower proficiency from Chinese backgrounds, frequently rely on the more rudimentary Stage 3 constructions. This reliance likely stems from incomplete acquisition of complex nominal and subordinate clause forms, underscoring challenges faced by learners as they align linguistic development with academic expectations.
The implications of these observations are profound. They suggest that success in academic writing transcends mere vocabulary acquisition; it necessitates an adeptness in manipulating complex syntactic devices. The study notably resonates with Zhang et al.’s (2023) call for English for Academic Purposes (EAP) instruction to transcend lexical and grammatical features, integrating coherence, formality, and task-specific complexity. Ultimately, this holistic perspective on academic writing can empower educators to tailor interventions that elevate both linguistic precision and rhetorical effectiveness.
Further analysis reveals significant variance in the deployment of grammatical features across proficiency levels, highlighting distinct cross-register differences between native and L2 compositions. The research delves into disciplinary registers, noting that engineering students display unique grammatical complexity profiles shaped by the communicative demands inherent in their fields. Notably, phrasal noun modifiers emerge as a salient marker of English proficiency, distinguishing native-like fluency from developing competence. This discovery offers a promising diagnostic tool for educators aiming to track and support learners’ progression toward academic fluency.
Exploring representative grammatical features, the study underscores the pivotal role of nominalization—transforming verbs or adjectives into nouns—in constructing dense and information-rich academic discourse. Corroborating Shen et al.’s (2023) findings, the researchers note that native English writers tend to produce more nominalized structures than L2 counterparts, a pattern attributed to inherent differences in syntactic cognition influenced by native language interference. This insight spotlights nominalization as a teaching priority, encouraging L2 learners to master and apply these constructions to achieve greater textual sophistication.
The investigation goes beyond descriptive analysis, integrating qualitative assessments of grammatical errors and phrase combinatorics involving verbs, nouns, and prepositions. By combining computational techniques with manual scrutiny, the researchers paint a comprehensive portrait of how grammatical complexity evolves in academic writing across linguistic groups. Such integrative methodologies are crucial for disentangling the overlapping influences of language proficiency, disciplinary norms, and educational trajectories.
At a macro theoretical level, the study validates and extends Biber et al.’s (2011, 2020) frameworks within international higher education contexts, specifically in China and Saudi Arabia. The findings reinforce earlier hypotheses that as students advance academically, their syntactic strategies shift from frequent use of complex dependent clauses toward more intricate phrasal constructions. This evolution reflects an increasing command over phrasal complexity, deemed essential for achieving academic rigor and nuance in writing.
Moreover, the research builds upon Staples et al.’s (2016) foundational framework by offering a comparative analysis of L1 and L2 writers’ grammatical complexity across multiple corpora. This broader lens uncovers not only developmental trajectories but also cross-linguistic divergences that inform both theory and practice. By situating learners within diverse academic and cultural milieus, the study highlights the multifactorial nature of grammatical complexity acquisition.
Complementing prior research by Lan et al. (2022), who proposed a four-factor model of grammatical complexity encompassing clausal subordination, phrasal construction, global length units, and other elements, this current study confirms the persistence of core complexity dimensions while revealing nuanced differences across L2 populations. These insights provoke further inquiry into the interplay of linguistic proficiency, genre conventions, and cognitive processing in shaping academic writing patterns.
From a pragmatic standpoint, the research offers actionable guidance for educators and learners alike. Tailored writing strategies emerge, including the encouragement of increased noun phrase usage for lower-proficiency students, leveraging the empowering effects of nominalization to enhance academic expression. Additionally, the promotion of more frequent use of Stage 2 structures promises to bring L2 writers’ output closer to native-like fluency—a recommendation supported by empirical evidence demonstrating Stage 2’s association with higher proficiency levels among Master’s and doctoral students.
Conversely, the study advocates for a reduction in reliance on Stage 3 structures, which are indicative of less advanced writing. This aligns with Parkinson and Musgrave’s (2014) observations that lower-proficiency students tend to overuse simpler stages, hampering their academic writing development. By cultivating strategic awareness of grammatical complexity stages, learners can consciously modulate their stylistic choices to meet escalating disciplinary expectations.
Looking towards future horizons, the study’s authors emphasize the necessity for deeper exploration of specific grammatical structures within varying disciplinary contexts. Understanding how and why certain features are deployed, and how they can be effectively taught, remains pivotal for advancing L2 writing proficiency. Expanding data collection across academic fields and proficiency stages promises to refine pedagogical approaches, fostering tailored support that matches the diverse demands faced by international students.
Ultimately, this research underscores the essential role grammatical complexity plays not merely as a linguistic attribute but as a determinant of academic and professional success. Its intricate examination of syntactic development, grounded in rigorous quantitative and qualitative analyses, provides a vital roadmap for educators, curriculum designers, and researchers striving to elevate the standards of academic writing in our increasingly globalized world.
The findings resonate beyond the confines of language instruction, touching upon fundamental questions of cognitive adaptation, intercultural communication, and educational equity. As universities continue to internationalize and student populations diversify, the precision with which we understand and scaffold grammatical complexity will shape the future trajectories of countless learners. This study, therefore, represents a critical step forward in decoding the linguistic challenges and potentials inherent in academic writing.
In synthesizing theoretical and empirical insights, Siu and colleagues deliver a compelling narrative that bridges linguistic scholarship and pedagogical innovation. By illuminating the paths through which grammatical complexity manifests and transforms, they invite a reimagining of academic writing instruction—one that is responsive, data-driven, and attuned to the variegated needs of international learners. The challenge now lies in translating these findings into effective classroom practices and institutional policies that empower students to unleash their full academic potential.
Subject of Research:
Exploration of grammatical complexity in L1 and L2 academic writing, focusing on non-English major engineering students’ developmental trajectories and proficiency-related syntactic features.
Article Title:
Exploring the grammatical complexity of L2 on non-English major learners’ writing: taking engineering students as a case study.
Article References:
Siu, B.W.Y., Afzaal, M., Saleh Aldayel, H. et al. Exploring the grammatical complexity of L2 on non-English major learners’ writing: taking engineering students as a case study. Humanit Soc Sci Commun 12, 974 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-025-05235-7
Image Credits: AI Generated
