Review of Durrant, Brenchley & McCallum (2021): Understanding Development and Proficiency in Writing: Quantitative Corpus Linguistic Approaches

References

1. Biber, D.
   (2009) A corpus-driven approach to formulaic language in English: Multi-word patterns in speech and writing. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 14(3), 275–311. 10.1075/ijcl.14.3.08bib
   https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.14.3.08bib [Google Scholar]
2. Biber, D., Gray, B., Staples, S., & Egbert, J.
   (2021) The Register-Functional Approach to Grammatical Complexity: Theoretical Foundation, Descriptive Research Findings, Application. Routledge. 10.4324/9781003087991
   https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003087991 [Google Scholar]
3. Brezina, V., & Pallotti, G.
   (2019) Morphological complexity in written L2 texts. Second Language Research, 35(1), 99–119. 10.1177/0267658316643125
   https://doi.org/10.1177/0267658316643125 [Google Scholar]
4. Gries, S. T.
   (2018) On over-and underuse in learner corpus research and multifactoriality in corpus linguistics more generally. Journal of Second Language Studies, 1(2), 276–308. 10.1075/jsls.00005.gri
   https://doi.org/10.1075/jsls.00005.gri [Google Scholar]
5. McNamara, D. S., Crossley, S. A., & McCarthy, P. M.
   (2010) Linguistic features of writing quality. Written Communication, 27(1), 57–86. 10.1177/0741088309351547
   https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088309351547 [Google Scholar]
6. Nesi, H., Gardner, S., Thompson, P. & Wickens, P.
   (2008–2010) The British Academic Written English Corpus (BAWE).
   [Google Scholar]
7. Paquot, M.
   (2019) The phraseological dimension in interlanguage complexity research. Second Language Research, 35(1), 121–145. 10.1177/0267658317694221
   https://doi.org/10.1177/0267658317694221 [Google Scholar]
8. Halliday, M. A. K. & Hasan, R.
   (1976) Cohesion in English. Longman.
   [Google Scholar]
9. Staples, S., Egbert, J., Biber, D., & Gray, B.
   (2016) Academic writing development at the university: Grammatical complexity across level of study, discipline, and genre. Written Communication, 33(2), 149–183. 10.1177/0741088316631527
   https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088316631527 [Google Scholar]