VOlUME 05 ISSUE 05 May 2026
Nagamurali Eragamreddy
General Requirements Unit, Preparatory Studies Center, University of Technology and Applied Sciences, Salalah, Sultanate of Oman
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1026-183X
DOI : https://doi.org/10.58806/ijsshmr.2026.v5i5n13Google Scholar Download Pdf
ABSTRACT
This systematic review critically explored the use of high-resolution linguistic measures in L2 writing testing, an area increasingly dependent on automatic means for objective measurement. It sought to determine the most widely used measures, what is known regarding their operationalization and validation, assess computation tools utilized, and explore variation by learner proficiency, genre, and context. The review included 52 English-language peer-reviewed articles and dissertations from 2020 to 2024, omitting those published in languages other than English and non-empirical sources. The systematic search approach was directed toward academic databases, and data extraction focused on measure type, tools employed, learner groups, and genre. Syntactic and lexical measures were prominent with tools such as L2SCA and Coh-Metrix applied to widespread applications. Cohesion and discourse-level features, however, remain underutilized despite having pedagogical value. Dissimilarity among measures employed at different levels of proficiency and genres uncovered underspecified domains of standardization, as well as cross-linguistic validation. The study concludes that although computational methods provide analytical precision, they necessitate language and contextual flexibility.
KEYWORDS:L2 writing assessment, fine-grained measures, syntactic complexity, lexical sophistication, computational tools
REFERENCES
1) Alaei, F., Kaivanpanah, S., & Mohammadi, M. (2024). Syntactic complexity and lexical
diversity in L1/L2 writing of EFL learners. Journal of English Language Teaching and Learning, 16(33), 97-115. https://doi.org/10.22034/elt.2024.59438.2590
2) Alkhalaf, S. A. A. (2022). Expressive writing in a Saudi university English foreign language (EFL) classroom: Evaluating gains in syntactic complexity. F1000Research, 11, 723. https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.121577.1
3) Alsahlanee, A., & Jaganathan, P. (2022). Lexical complexity in the writings of Iraqi, English L2, and English L1 writers. Asian Journal of University Education, 18(4), 1105-1118. http://dx.doi.org/10.24191/ajue.v18i4.20044
4) Alshehri, A. (2022). Writing proficiency of Saudi EFL learners: Examining the impact of lexical diversity. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 18(Special Issue 1), 519-529.
5) Alshehri, N. (2024). The role of task type in enhancing writing fluency: A study of Saudi female university students. International Journal of Linguistics, Literature and Translation, 7(10), 1-7. https://doi.org/10.32996/ijllt.2024.7.10.1
6) Aminovna, B. D. (2022). Importance of coherence and cohesion in writing. Eurasian Research Bulletin, 4, 83–89. https://geniusjournals.org/index.php/erb/article/view/431
7) Ansarin, A. A., Karafkan, M. A., & Hadidi, Y. (2021). The effects of task type on Iranian EFL learners’ use of lexical diversity and sophistication. Applied Research on English Language, 10(4), 39-70. https://doi.org/10.22108/are.2021.126660.1673
8) Ayadi, M. (2023). Lexical richness and syntactic complexity as predictors of academic writing performance. Journal of English Studies in Arabia Felix, 2(1), 23-33. https://doi.org/10.56540/jesaf.v2i1.43
9) Bae, J., & Min, S. (2020). Genre-based analysis of syntactic complexity in L2 college students' writing: pedagogic scope and directions. Journal of Asia TEFL, 17(3), 937. http://dx.doi.org/10.18823/asiatefl.2020.17.3.12.937
10) Bi, P., & Jiang, J. (2020). Syntactic complexity in assessing young adolescent EFL learners’ writings: Syntactic elaboration and diversity. System, 91, 102248. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2020.102248
11) Bulté, B., & Housen, A. (2014). Conceptualizing and measuring short-term L2 grammatical development. Journal of Second Language Writing, 26, 42-65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2014.09.005
12) Chau, T. C. (2023). The relationships between L1, writing quality, and complexity, accuracy, and fluency in L2 writing [Doctoral dissertation, University of South Florida]. https://digitalcommons.usf.edu/etd/10106
13) Cheung, Y.L., Chu, Y., & Jang, H. (2021). Impact of a socio-cognitive approach to teaching English language writing on primary school students’ compositions. Iranian Journal of Language Teaching Research, 9(1), (Jan., 2021) 1-22. https://doi.org/10.30466/ijltr.2021.120973
14) Chomsky, N. (1995). The minimalist program. MIT Press.
15) Chon, Y. V., & Shin, D. (2020). Direct writing, translated writing, and machine-translated writing: A text level analysis with Coh-metrix. English Teaching, 75(1), 25-48. https://doi.org/10.15858/engtea.75.1.202003.25
16) Crossley, S. A., Kyle, K., & McNamara, D. S. (2016). The development and use of cohesive devices in L2 writing and their relation to judgments of essay quality. Journal of Second Language Writing, 32, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2016.01.003
17) Esfandiari, R., & Ahmadi, M. (2024). Syntactic complexity in novice and expert L2 academic writing: The role of syntactic elaboration and diversity. Journal of Language Horizons, 8(1), 115-138. https://doi.org/10.22051/lghor.2023.43081.1780
18) Golparvar, S. E., & Rashidi, F. (2021). The effect of task complexity on integrated writing performance: The case of multiple-text source-based writing. System, 99, 102524. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2021.102524
19) Graesser, A. C., McNamara, D. S., McCarthy, P. M., & Cai, Z. (2014). Coh-Metrix: An automated tool for theoretical and applied natural language processing. Routledge.
20) Granados, A., López-Jiménez, M. D., & Lorenzo, F. (2022). A longitudinal study of L2 historical writing. Ibérica, 43, 129-154. https://doi.org/10.17398/2340-2784.43.129
21) Hassanzadeh, M., Saffari, E., & Rezaei, S. (2021). The impact of computer-aided concept mapping on EFL learners’ lexical diversity: A process writing experiment. ReCALL, 33(3), 214-228. https://doi.org/10.1017/S095834402100001X
22) He, Z. (2020). Cohesion in academic writing: a comparison of essays in English written by L1 and L2 university students. Theory & Practice in Language Studies, 10(7), 761-770. http://dx.doi.org/10.17507/tpls.1007.06
23) Heng, R., Pu, L., & Liu, X. (2023). The effects of genre on the lexical richness of argumentative and expository writing by Chinese EFL learners. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 1082228. http://dx.doi.org/10.17507/tpls.1007.06
24) Hyland, K. (2007). Genre pedagogy: Language, literacy and L2 writing instruction. Journal of second language writing, 16(3), 148-164. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2007.07.005
25) Istiharoh, A. F., & Pranowo, D. D. (2023). The development of syntactic complexity in university students’ essays. Englisia: Journal of Language, Education, and Humanities, 11(1), 1-18. https://doi.org/10.22373/ej.v11i1.19129
26) Karadeniz, A. (2017). Cohesion and coherence in written texts of students of faculty of education. Journal of Education and Training Studies, 5(2), 93-99. http://dx.doi.org/10.11114/jets.v5i2.1998
27) Kessler, M., Ma, W., & Solheim, I. (2022). The effects of topic familiarity on text quality, complexity, accuracy, and fluency: A conceptual replication. TESOL Quarterly, 56(4), 1163-1190. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.3096
28) Khushik, G. A., & Huhta, A. (2020). Investigating syntactic complexity in EFL learners' writing across common European framework of reference levels A1, A2, and B1. Applied Linguistics, 41(4), 506-532. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amy064
29) Kim, M. (2021). Exploring longitudinal changes in lexical and syntactic features in beginning level EFL learner writing. System, 103, 102680. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2021.102680
30) Kim, M., Kim, Y., & Kang, S. (2024). The dynamics of changes in linguistic complexity and writing scores in timed argumentative writing among beginning-level EFL learners. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 63(4):2891-2925. https://doi.org/10.1515/iral-2023-0287
31) Krashen, S. D. (1985). The input hypothesis: Issues and implications. Longman.
32) Kyle, K., & Crossley, S. A. (2015). Automatically assessing lexical sophistication: Indices, tools, findings, and application. TESOL Quarterly, 49(4), 757–786. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.194
33) Kyle, K., & Crossley, S. A. (2018). Assessing syntactic sophistication in L2 writing: A usage based approach. Language Testing, 35(4), 515–535. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532217712554
34) Kyle, K., Crossley, S., & Verspoor, M. (2021). Measuring longitudinal writing development using indices of syntactic complexity and sophistication. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 43(4), 781-812. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263120000546
35) Lahuerta Martínez, A.C. (2024). The dynamics of syntactic and lexical complexity measures in academic writing. Ibérica. 251-274. https://doi.org/10.17398/2340-2784.47.251
36) Lahuerta, A. C. (2023). L2 Writing: A comparison of upper intermediate and advanced EFL learners. European Journal of Language and Literature Studies, 9(2), 64-71. https://doi.org/10.2478/ejls-2023-0016
37) Levelt, W. J. M. (1989). Speaking: From intention to articulation. MIT Press.
38) Li, Y., Nikitina, L., & Riget, P. N. (2022). Development of syntactic complexity in Chinese
university students’ L2 argumentative writing. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 56, 101099. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2022.101099
39) Lipková M. (2024). Lexical density in academic writing: Lexical features and learner corpora analysis in L2 tertiary students’ essays and didactic implications. The Asian Conference on Education 2023: Official Conference Proceedings (pp. 1175-1188) https://doi.org/10.22492/issn.2186-5892.2024.98
40) Lu, X. (2010). Automatic analysis of syntactic complexity in second language writing. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 15(4), 474–496. https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.15.4.02lu
41) Malvern, D., Richards, B., Chipere, N., & Durán, P. (2004). Lexical diversity and language development: Quantification and assessment. Palgrave Macmillan.
42) McCarthy, P. M., & Jarvis, S. (2010). MTLD, vocd-D, and HD-D: A validation study of sophisticated approaches to lexical diversity assessment. Behavior Research Methods, 42(2), 381–392. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.42.2.381
43) McNamara, D. S., Crossley, S. A., & McCarthy, P. M. (2010). Linguistic features of writing quality. Written communication, 27(1), 57-86. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088309351547
44) McNamara, D. S., Graesser, A. C., McCarthy, P. M., & Cai, Z. (2014). Automated evaluation of text and discourse with Coh-Metrix. Cambridge University Press.
45) Monteiro, K. R., Crossley, S. A., & Kyle, K. (2020). In search of new benchmarks: Using L2 lexical frequency and contextual diversity indices to assess second language writing. Applied Linguistics, 41(2), 280-300. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amy056
46) Nation, I. S. P. (2013). Learning vocabulary in another language (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139858656
47) Nguyen, B. T. T., Newton, J., & Tran, Q. P. N. (2022). The effect of topic on EFL writing by Vietnamese tertiary students: Insights from combining a lexical richness analysis with student self-reports. Language Related Research, 13(5), 511-540. http://dx.doi.org/10.52547/LRR.13.5.19
48) Ortega, L. (2003). Syntactic complexity measures and their relationship to L2 proficiency: A research synthesis of college‐level L2 writing. Applied Linguistics, 24(4), 492–518. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/24.4.492
49) Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D.,
Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E. A., Brennan, S. E., Chou, R., Glanville, J., Grimshaw, J. M., Hróbjartsson, A., Lalu, M. M., Li, T., Loder, E. W., Mayo-Wilson, E., McDonald, S., . . . Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 372, Article n71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71
50) Peng, Y., Sun, J., Quan, J., Wang, Y., Lv, C., & Zhang, H. (2023). Predicting Chinese EFL
learners’ human‐rated writing quality in argumentative writing through multidimensional computational indices of lexical complexity. Assessing Writing, 56, 100722. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2023.100722
51) Peng, Y., Zheng, Y., Sun, J., Jiang, Y., Lin, J., & Zhang, H. (2024). Modeling relationships among large-grained, fine-grained absolute syntactic complexity and assessed L2 writing quality: An SEM approach. Assessing Writing, 61, 100875. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2024.100875
52) Pienemann, M. (2005). Cross-linguistic aspects of processability theory. John Benjamins.
53) Qian, L., Cheng, Y., & Zhao, Y. (2021). Use of linguistic complexity in writing among Chinese EFL learners in high-stakes tests: Insights from a corpus of TOEFL iBT. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 765983. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.765983
54) Qin, W., & Uccelli, P. (2020). Beyond linguistic complexity: Assessing register flexibility in EFL writing across contexts. Assessing Writing, 45, 100465. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2020.100465
55) Rivard, L. P., & Gueye, N. R. (2023). Syntactic complexity and connector use in the summary writing of L1 and L2 Canadian students. Journal of French Language Studies, 33(2), 197-226. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0959269522000291
56) Seo, J. Y. (2024). Exploring the educational potential of ChatGPT: AI-assisted narrative writing for EFL college students. Language Teaching Research Quarterly, 43, 1-21. https://doi.org/10.32038/ltrq.2024.43.01
57) Susoy, Z. & Köse, D. G. (2024). An evaluation of syntactic complexity, lexical diversity
and text length as predictors of foreign language writing scores. Erzincan University Journal of Education Faculty, 26(4), 542-553. https://doi.org/10.17556/erziefd.1483282
58) Sweller, J. (2011). Cognitive load theory. Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 55, 37–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-387691-1.00002-8
59) Tabari, M. A., & Wind, A. (2023). Dynamic development of cohesive devices in English as a second language writing. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 63(1), 433-469. https://doi.org/10.1515/iral-2022-0205
60) Tabari, M. A., Lu, X., & Wang, Y. (2023). The effects of task complexity on lexical complexity in L2 writing: An exploratory study. System, 114, 103021. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2023.103021
61) Thi, N. K., Vo, D. V., & Nikolov, M. (2023). Investigating syntactic complexity and language related error patterns in EFL students’ writing: corpus-based and epistemic network analyses. Language Learning in Higher Education, 13(1), 127-151. https://doi.org/10.1515/cercles-2023-2009
62) Tian, Y., Kim, M., Crossley, S., & Wan, Q. (2021). Cohesive devices as an indicator of L2 students' writing fluency. Reading and Writing, 1-23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-021-10229-3
63) Ure, J. (1971). Lexical density and register differentiation. In G. E. Perren & J. L. M. Trim (Eds.), Applications of linguistics (pp. 443–452). Cambridge University Press.
64) Wang, Y. (2023). The interplay of linguistic complexity measures and their relation to the quality of L2 argumentative writing. Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Educational Innovation and Philosophical Inquiries. https://doi.org/10.54254/2753-7064/11/20231365
65) Weigle, S. C. (2002). Assessing writing. Cambridge University Press.
66) Wind, A. M. (2022). The development of syntactic complexity and fluency in an advanced writing course. In A. Wind & J. Csizér (Eds.), DEAL 2022: Challenges and Opportunities in Contemporary English Applied Linguistics (pp. 97-118). Eötvös University Press. https://doi.org/10.21862/ELTE.DEAL.2022.4.97
67) Wondemagegne, E., Simegn, B., & Adugna, E. T. (2024). Exploring syntactic complexity and its relationship with writing quality in EFL argumentative essays. Journal of Language Research, 1 (2), 13-35. https://doi.org/10.14302/issn.2998-4122.jlr-24-4985
68) Xue, Y. (2024). Towards automated writing evaluation: A comprehensive review with
bibliometric, scientometric, and meta-analytic approaches. Education and Information Techno logies, 29(15), 19553-19594. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-12596-0
69) Yang, Y., Yap, N. T., & Ali, A. M. (2023). Predicting EFL expository writing quality with
measures of lexical richness. Assessing Writing, 57, 100762.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2023.100762
70) Zenouzagh, Z. M. (2020). Syntactic complexity in individual, collaborative and E collaborative EFL writing: mediating role of writing modality, L1 and sustained development in focus. Educational Technology Research and Development, 68(6), 2939-2970. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09818-w
71) Zhang, C., & Kang, S. (2022). A comparative study on lexical and syntactic features of ESL versus EFL learners’ writing. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 1002090. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1002090
72) Zhang, X., & Lu, X. (2022). Revisiting the predictive power of traditional vs. fine-grained
syntactic complexity indices for L2 writing quality: The case of two genres. Assessing Writing, 51, 100597. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2021.100597
73) Zhang, C. (2022). Multidimensional interaction of L2 writing fluency and cohesion: A complexity theory perspective. Southern African Linguistics and Applied Language Studies, 40(4), 397-412. https://doi.org/10.2989/16073614.2022.2075773
74) Zhang, L. & Liu, H. (2021). Genre effect on L2 syntactic complexity and holistic rating for
writing quality of intermediate EFL learners. Chinese Journal of Applied Linguistics, 44(4), 451-469. https://doi.org/10.1515/CJAL-2021-0029
75) Zhang, X., & Li, W. (2024). Remodeling effects of linguistic features on L2 writing quality of two genres. Reading and Writing, 37(5), 1209-1234. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-023-10438-y
76) Zhang, J. & Zhang, L. (2024). Examining L2 studentsʼ development of global cohesion and its relationship with their argumentative essay quality. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching. https://doi.org/10.1515/iral-2023-0069
77) Zindela, N. (2023). Comparing measures of syntactic and lexical complexity in artificial
intelligence and L2 human-generated argumentative essays. International Journal of Education and Development Using Information and Communication Technology, 19(3), 50-68. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1413411.pdf
Cite this Article:Eragamreddy, N. (2026). A Systematic Review of Fine-Grained Measures used in L2 Writing Assessment Research. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SOCIAL SCIENCE HUMANITY & MANAGEMENT RESEARCHS, 5(5), 1031-1046. https://doi.org/10.58806/ijsshmr.2026.v5i5n13