TY - JOUR
T1 - Exploring the differences in syntactic complexity between lay summaries and abstracts
T2 - A case study of The New England Journal of Medicine
AU - Kang, Mengchao
AU - Jin, Tan
AU - Lu, Xiaofei
AU - Zhang, Haomin
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2024 Elsevier Ltd
PY - 2024/11
Y1 - 2024/11
N2 - This study explores the difference in syntactic complexity between lay summaries (LSs) and scientific abstracts holistically and across their common rhetorical moves. Twenty-three syntactic complexity indices were employed to analyze a corpus of LSs and their counterpart abstracts from The New England Journal of Medicine. The analyses revealed that the LSs employed significantly shorter production units, more subordinate structures, more verb phrases, but fewer coordinate phrases and fewer complex nominals. Notably, the number of specific noun modifiers within complex nominals did not differ significantly between the two groups, indicating a comparable level of nominal sophistication. Moreover, we observed significant differences in the syntactic complexity of sentences realizing the common rhetorical moves across the two genres. Specifically, sentences introducing background and presenting results were syntactically simpler in the LSs, whereas the syntactic complexity of sentences summarizing methods and drawing conclusions remains largely consistent across both groups. The study contributes to a deeper understanding of the linguistic features of LSs and offers useful implications for LS writing practice.
AB - This study explores the difference in syntactic complexity between lay summaries (LSs) and scientific abstracts holistically and across their common rhetorical moves. Twenty-three syntactic complexity indices were employed to analyze a corpus of LSs and their counterpart abstracts from The New England Journal of Medicine. The analyses revealed that the LSs employed significantly shorter production units, more subordinate structures, more verb phrases, but fewer coordinate phrases and fewer complex nominals. Notably, the number of specific noun modifiers within complex nominals did not differ significantly between the two groups, indicating a comparable level of nominal sophistication. Moreover, we observed significant differences in the syntactic complexity of sentences realizing the common rhetorical moves across the two genres. Specifically, sentences introducing background and presenting results were syntactically simpler in the LSs, whereas the syntactic complexity of sentences summarizing methods and drawing conclusions remains largely consistent across both groups. The study contributes to a deeper understanding of the linguistic features of LSs and offers useful implications for LS writing practice.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85203832029&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85203832029&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.jeap.2024.101444
DO - 10.1016/j.jeap.2024.101444
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85203832029
SN - 1475-1585
VL - 72
JO - Journal of English for Academic Purposes
JF - Journal of English for Academic Purposes
M1 - 101444
ER -