[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"doc-seo-596339-105":3,"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":81,"doc-detail-596339-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"ok",{"site_id":7,"language":8,"slug":9,"title":10,"keywords":11,"description":12,"schema_data":13,"social_meta":74,"head_meta":76,"extra_data":78,"updated_unix":80},105,"en","aspects-of-efl-university-learners-lexical-and-phraseological-proficiency-as-predictors-of-writing-quality","Aspects of EFL University Learners’ Lexical and Phraseological Proficiency as Predictors of Writing Quality","","This study examines how productive lexical and phraseological knowledge predicts writing quality in English as a Foreign Language (EFL). A sample of 120 expository essays written by university students in semesters 1 and 5 is evaluated by human raters and analyzed automatically using targeted indices. Content word frequency and range distinguish proficiency levels, unlike lexical diversity. Phraseological measures using rare and frequent bigrams show group differences, with higher-proficiency students performing better.",{"@graph":14,"@context":73},[15,34,56],{"@type":16,"itemListElement":17},"BreadcrumbList",[18,23,27,31],{"item":19,"name":20,"@type":21,"position":22},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",1,{"item":24,"name":25,"@type":21,"position":26},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/","Document",2,{"item":28,"name":29,"@type":21,"position":30},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/","Research & Report",3,{"item":32,"name":10,"@type":21,"position":33},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/aspects-of-efl-university-learners-lexical-and-phraseological-proficiency-as-predictors-of-writing-quality/596339/",4,{"url":32,"name":10,"@type":35,"image":36,"author":41,"headline":10,"publisher":44,"fileFormat":47,"inLanguage":8,"description":12,"dateModified":48,"datePublished":49,"encodingFormat":47,"isAccessibleForFree":50,"interactionStatistic":51},"DigitalDocument",{"url":37,"@type":38,"width":39,"height":40},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/aspects-of-efl-university-learners-lexical-and-phraseological-proficiency-as-predictors-of-writing-quality/596339.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":42,"@type":43},"Guten tag","Person",{"url":19,"name":45,"@type":46},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-11-04","2026-10-15",true,{"@type":52,"interactionType":53,"userInteractionCount":55},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":54},"ViewAction",8,{"@type":57,"mainEntity":58},"FAQPage",[59,65,69],{"name":60,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":62},"What does the study investigate about EFL learners’ writing?","Question",{"text":63,"@type":64},"It investigates whether productive lexical and phraseological indices can predict the quality of EFL learners’ written production.","Answer",{"name":66,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":67},"How was writing quality measured in the study?",{"text":68,"@type":64},"Writing quality was rated by human evaluators and analyzed with automatic examination of targeted lexical and phraseological indices.",{"name":70,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":71},"Which lexical indicators distinguished proficiency levels?",{"text":72,"@type":64},"Content word frequency and range significantly discriminated between proficiency levels, while lexical diversity did not show the same discriminating effect.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":32,"og:type":75,"og:title":10,"og:site_name":45,"og:description":12},"article",{"robots":77,"canonical":32},"index,follow",{"doc_id":79,"site_id":7},596339,1792481838,{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":83},"success",[84,88,92,96,101,106,111,114,119,122,126],{"id":22,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":85,"show_sort_weight":86,"slug":87},"Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":26,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":89,"show_sort_weight":90,"slug":91},"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":33,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":93,"show_sort_weight":94,"slug":95},"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":97,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":98,"show_sort_weight":99,"slug":100},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":102,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":103,"show_sort_weight":104,"slug":105},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":107,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":108,"show_sort_weight":109,"slug":110},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":55,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":29,"show_sort_weight":112,"slug":113},30,"research-report",{"id":115,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":116,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":118},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":117,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":120,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":121},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":123,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":124,"show_sort_weight":123,"slug":125},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":127,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":128,"show_sort_weight":97,"slug":129},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":131},{"doc_id":79,"user_id":132,"nickname":42,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":55,"category_name":29,"doc_title":10,"doc_description":12,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":55,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":22,"is_downloadable":22,"audit_status":22,"page_count":139,"language":140,"language_code":8,"site_id":7,"html_lang":8,"table_of_contents":141,"faqs":142,"seo_title":143,"seo_description":12,"update_tm":144,"read_time":99,"preview_page_count":4},687212321768,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/avatar/a0010bdbe886d2fe77?x-image-process=image/resize,m_fixed,w_180,h_180&k=1789897067658708522","Aspects of EFL University Learners’ Lexical and Phraseological Proficiency as Predictors of Writing Quality  \nBrahim Ait Hammou  \nMinistry of National Education  \nMohammed Larouz  \nMoulay Ismail University  \nMustapha Fagroud  \nMoulay Ismail University  \nFouad Akki  \nMoulay Ismail University  \nAbstract  \nThis study aims to examine the relationship between the productive knowledge of some lexical and phraseological indices and the quality of English as a Foreign Language (EFL) learners’ writing. A sample of 120 expository essays, written by semesters 1 and 5 university students in a less proficient EFL context, are rated by human evaluators and automatically examined for the target indices. The results show that, unlike the index of lexical diversity, both indices of content word frequency and range could significantly discriminate between different proficiency levels. For the phraseological indices, both the proportions of rare and frequent bigrams yielded between-group differences, with higher proficiency students performing significantly better in both categories. Using a regression analysis, the results show that the use of rare and contextually restricted content words and the production of larger proportions of rare and frequent bigrams could be considered indicators of better writing proficiency. The study suggests implications for the teaching of EFL.  \nRésumé  \nCette étude vise à examiner la relation entre les compétences lexicales/phraséologiques et laqualité de la production écrite des étudiants de l’anglais/langue étrangère. Un échantillon de 120 essais explicatifs écrits par des étudiants des semestres 1 et 5 dans un contexte EFL moins compétent, sont notés par des évaluateurs humains et examinés pour les indices cibles en utilisant un traitement automatique. Les résultats montrent que, contrairement à l'indice de diversité lexicale, la fréquence et la distribution contextuelle de mots de contenu peuvent distinguer entre les deux différents niveaux. Pour les indices phraséologiques, les proportions de bigrammes rares et fréquents ont produit des différences entre les deux groupes : les étudiants de S5 sont les plus performants avec de meilleurs résultats dans les deux catégories.À l'aide d'une régression linéaire, les résultats montrent que l'utilisation de mots de contenurares et contextuellement restreints et aussi une plus grande proportion de bigrammes rareset fréquents pourraient être considérés comme des indicateurs d'une meilleure compétence  \nen production écrite. L'étude suggère des implications pour l'enseignement et l’apprentissage de l'anglais en tant que langue étrangère.  \nAspects of EFL University Learners’ Lexical and Phraseological Proficiency as  \nPredictors of Writing Quality  \nIntroduction  \nThe development of learners’ lexical knowledge at the level of both lexical sophistication and phraseological knowledge has gained paramount importance with advances in computational linguistics. Recent research in phraseology has highlighted that“language is highly patterned”(Römer, 2009, p. 141). This principle is emphasized by Sinclair (1991, 1996), who maintains that a large amount of a speaker’s knowledge is composed of ready-made linguistic patterns. Cognitive linguistic research (e.g., Ellis, 2002a, 2002b) has underlined the role of frequency in language development. Previous studies (e.g., Durrant & Schmitt, 2009; Laufer,1994; Laufer & Nation, 1995) show that learners’ lexical knowledge is to a large extent influenced by its frequency. Contextual distribution, or word range, also impacts lexical production in the sense that more proficient learners produce texts with more contextually restricted lexical items (Crossley et al., 2013; Gries, 2010; Kyle & Crossley, 2016) . Similarly, calculating the diversity of vocabulary in a text has also been facilitated by the availability of sophisticated computer programs. Lexical diversity (henceforth, LD) in learner corpora has been reported to be an indicator o","cbCaikNmq0yGl3DL","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaikNmq0yGl3DL","pdf",435087,24,"English","# Introduction\n# Literature Review\n## Lexical Sophistication","[{\"question\":\"What does the study investigate about EFL learners’ writing?\",\"answer\":\"It investigates whether productive lexical and phraseological indices can predict the quality of EFL learners’ written production.\"},{\"question\":\"How was writing quality measured in the study?\",\"answer\":\"Writing quality was rated by human evaluators and analyzed with automatic examination of targeted lexical and phraseological indices.\"},{\"question\":\"Which lexical indicators distinguished proficiency levels?\",\"answer\":\"Content word frequency and range significantly discriminated between proficiency levels, while lexical diversity did not show the same discriminating effect.\"}]","Aspects of EFL University Learners’ Lexical and Phraseological Proficiency as Predictors of Writing Quality | PDF",1792082890]