| Discourse writing is an important way to improve the language level of second language learners.Due to the different types of styles,the language characteristics of the written texts of learners at the same level may show different performances.This paper attempts to analyze the reasons for the differences by studying the differences in the language characteristics of narrative writing,argumentative writing,and applied writing for advanced Japanese learners of Chinese,and then put forward useful suggestions for the testing and teaching of Chinese as a second language.On the basis of previous research and according to the characteristics of Chinese itself,this paper selected a series of quantitative indicators to measure language characteristics,and recorded 30 narrative essays,argumentative essays,and practical essays(a total of 90 essays)for Japanese learners of Chinese at the advanced level in the HSK dynamic composition corpus.The linguistic features of the corpus were measured.Use the "word segmentation tool" function of HSK dynamic composition corpus and "Chinese reading grading compass"(Jin Tan et al.2018)to organize the corpus,and used SPSS28.0 to descriptively and differentially analyzed 14 indicators in three dimensions of language characteristics,trying to Find out the differences in the language characteristics of writing in different styles of Japanese Chinese learners at the advanced level.Through quantitative analysis of the data,the following results are obtained:(1)In terms of accuracy,the lexical correctness and grammatical correctness of narrative essay,argumentative essay and practical essay did not show significant genre differences;the correctness of Chinese characters in narrative essay and practical essay was significantly higher than that of argumentative essay,narrative essay and practical essay.There is no significant difference in the correctness of Chinese characters.(2)In terms of lexical complexity,there was no significant difference in lexical diversity and lexical density among the three styles.In terms of lexical difficulty,there is no significant difference between narrative and argumentative essays.Both narrative essays and argumentative essays show significantly higher lexical difficulty than practical essays..(3)In terms of syntactic complexity,narrative essays is significantly higher than those of argumentative essays and applied essays in terms of the number of topic chains,the number of topic chain clauses,and zero-form components,but there is no significant difference between argumentative essays and applied essays;In terms of the total length of modification degree,the total number of complex noun phrases,and the ratio of complex noun phrases,narrative texts and argumentative texts is significantly higher than application texts.There is no significant difference between the essays,and the ratio of complex noun phrases in argumentative essays is significantly higher than that in narrative essays.In addition,in terms of T-unit length,argumentative essays are significantly higher than narrative essays and applied essays,and there is no significant difference between narrative essays and applied essays.(4)In terms of fluency,the total word count of narrative essays is significantly higher than that of argumentative essays,but there is no significant difference between argumentative essays and practical essays.This paper is divided into five parts.The first part introduced the reason for choosing the topic,the research background,and the research ideas and methods.The second part introduced the research design and measurement index system,including the research questions,the source of the corpus,the selection of each language feature index and the definition of the operation.The third part made a descriptive and difference analysis of 14 language characteristic indicators in three dimensions of writing in different styles,and compared the research results with the research results of others,and discussed the reasons for the differences.The fourth part is the conclusion and enlightenment of this paper.The last section explained the limitations of this paper and suggestions for improvement. |
PDF Full Text Request