LEXICAL DENSITY AND READABILITY IN STUDENTS’ THESIS INTRODUCTIONS
Abstract
This study investigates lexical density and readability in students’ undergraduate thesis introductions. Documentation technique is used to collect the data while qualitative content analysis was employed as the method to present the data. The data of this study were content words and sentences taken from the data sources of 20 undergraduate’s thesis introductions. The scores of lexical density and readability were obtained by using Flesch Reading Ease Tool online. The findings show that all introductions exhibit high lexical density, with scores ranging from 51,28% to 68,08%. Whilst, the readability scores range from 10.92 to 17.58, and they are all categorized as being very difficult writings. In summary, the findings demonstrate that all thesis introductions exhibit a high level of complexity in their writing. These introductions showcase the deliberate use of rich and precise content words. Consequently, they pose a significant challenge for comprehension due to their density.
References
Courtis, J. K., & Hassan, S. (2002). Reading Ease of Bilingual Annual Reports. Journal of Business Communication 39(4), 394 - 413.
DuBay, W. H. (2004). The Principles of Readability. Impact Information.
Ebrahimi, S. F., & Heng, C. S. (2018). Lexical Complexity in Master's Dissertations. GEMA Online® Journal of Language Studies, 18(1), 33-49.
Eggins, Suzanne. 2004. An Introduction to Systemic Functional Linguistics Second Language. New York: Continuum International Publishing Group.
Flesch, Rudolf. (1949). The Art of Readable Writing. New York: Harper & Row Publisher.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1985). Spoken and Written Language. New York: Oxford University Press.
Hanafiah, Ridwan., and Yusuf, Muhammad. (2016). Lexical Density and Grammatical Intricacy in Linguistic Thesis Abstract: A Qualitative Content Analysis. Proceedings of the 1st English Education International Conference (EEIC) in conjunction with the 2nd Reciprocal Graduate Research Symposium (RGRS) of the Consortium of Asia-Pacific Education Universities (CAPEU) between Sultan Idris Education University and Syiah Kuala University November 12-13.
Johansson, Victoria. (2008). Lexical diversity and lexical density in speech and writing: a developmental perspective. Lund University, Dept. of Linguistics and Phonetics Working Papers 53 (2008), 61.
Johansson, V. (2009). Lexical diversity and lexical density in speech and writing: A developmental perspective. Lund Working Papers in Linguistics, 53, 61–79.
Kate, R., Luo, X., Patwardhan, S., Franz, M., Florian, R., Mooney, R., Roukos, S., & Welty, C (2010). Learning to Predict Readability Using Diverse Linguistic Features. In: Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Computational Linguistics, (pp. 546–554). Association for Computational Linguistics.
Kincaid, J. P., Fishburne Jr, R. P., Rogers, R. L., & Chissom, B. S. (1975). Derivation of new readability formulas (automated readability index, fog count and flesch reading ease formula) for navy enlisted personnel. Naval Technical Training Command Millington TN Research Branch.
Mayangsari, A., Wuli Fitriati, S., & Sutopo, D. (2021). Lexical Complexity and Readibility Realized in The Introduction Sections of Selected English Journals. English Education Journal, 11(2), 298-307. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.15294/eej.v11i1.44074.
Nasseri, Maryam., & Thompson., Paul. (2021). Lexical Density and Diversity in Dissertation Abstracts: Revisiting English L1 vs. L2 Text Differences. Journal of Assessing Writing Volume 47, January 2021. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2020.100511.
Noorzan, M. N. & Page, G. M. (2012). Writing Your Thesis. Kuala Lumpur: Pearson Malaysia.
Sinar, T. S., Zein, T. T., Ganie, R., Syarfina, T., Mahriyuni, Yusuf, M., & Rangkuti, R. (2023). Content Words and Readability in Students' Thesis Findings. Journal of Curriculum and Teaching, 12(6), 347-355.
Stubbs. M. (2002). Words and Phrases: Corpus Studies of Lexical Semantics. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
Susoy, Zafer. Lexical Density, Lexical Diversity and Academic Vocabulary Use: Differences in Dissertation Abstracts. Acuity: Journal of English Language Pedagogy, Literature and Culture, v8 n2 p198-210 2023.
Swales, J. M., & Feak, C. B. (2012). Academic Writing for Graduate Students: Essential Tasks and Skills (3rd ed.). Ann Arbor, MI: The University of Michigan Press.
Swales, J. M. (1990). Genre Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Syafitri, S.E., Sinar, T. S., Mulyadi., & Masdiana. (2022). Types of Minor Clauses in Kindergarten English Interactions. World Journal of English Language,12(04).
Syarif, H., & Putri, R. E. (2018). How Lexical Density Reveals Students' Ability in Writing Academic Text. LINGUA DIDAKTIKA, 12(2), 86-94.
Wuttisrisiriporn, Niwat. Comparative Rhetorical Organization of ELT Thesis Introductions
Composed by Thai and American Students. Language Institute, Burapha University, Chonburi, Thailand.
Zainuddin, S.Z, Shaari, A.H. A Genre-Inspired Investigation of Establishing the Territory in Thesis Introductions by Malaysian ESL Writers. 3L: Language, Linguistics, Literature. The Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies Vol 27(2), June 2021 retrieved from http://doi.org/10.17576/3L-2021-2702-11 144.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Open Access Policy
This is an open access journal which means that all content is freely available without charge to the users or their institution. Users are allowed to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of the articles, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without asking prior permission from the publisher or the author. This is in accordance with the BOAI definition of open access.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
