Syntax and the Evaluation of College Writing: A Blind Alley

  • Carl Mills


In 1977, Kellogg Hunt wrote that “in the mid-seventies... the English teaching profession has a theory of syntactic development that covers a broad range of structures.” He went on to say that “to the present time, the teaching of language has been guided almost exclusively by the rhetorician’s intuition. But the theory of syntactic development reviewed here does not rest upon intuition alone; it rests on a solid body of experimental data” (Hunt 1977: 102).


Main Clause Subordinate Clause Syntactic Complexity Twelfth Grader Abstract Noun 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Beaman, Karen. (1984). Coordination and subordination revisited: syntactic complexity in spoken and written narrative discourse. Coherence in spoken and written discourse, ed. by D. Tannen. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
  2. Carroll, John B., Davies, Peter, and Richman, Barry. 1971. The American Heritage word frequency book. New York: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
  3. Chafe, Wallace (Ed.). (1980). The pear stories cognitive, cultural, and linguistic aspects of narrative production. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
  4. Chomsky, Noam. (1957). Syntactic structures. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
  5. Cooper, Charles R. (1977). Holistic evaluation of writing. Evaluating writing: describing, measuring, judging, ed. by Charles R. Cooper & Lee Odell. Urbana: NCTE. pp.3–31.Google Scholar
  6. Finn, Patrick J. 1977. Computer-aided description of mature word choices. Evaluating writing: describing, measuring, judging, ed. by Charles R. Cooper & Lee Odell. Urbana: NCTE. pp. 69–89.Google Scholar
  7. Gebhard, Ann O. (1978). Writing quality and syntax: a transformational analysis of three prose samples. Research in the Teaching of English 4, 211–231.Google Scholar
  8. Halliday, M. A. K. (1979). Differences between spoken and written language: some implications for literacy teaching. Communication through reading: Proceedings of the Fourth Australian Reading Conference, ed. by G. Page, J. Elkins, & B. O’Connor. Adelaide: Australian Reading Assoc. II: 37–52.Google Scholar
  9. Higgs, Rosalee Orma. (1983). The impact of discourse mode, syntactic complexity, and story grammar on the writings of sixth graders. DAI 45, 80A.Google Scholar
  10. Hunt, Kellogg W. (1965). Grammatical structures written at three grade levels. NCTE Research Report No. 3. Champaign: NCTE.Google Scholar
  11. ———. (1970). Syntactic maturity in school children and adults. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, no. 134, vol. 35, no. 3.Google Scholar
  12. Hunt, Kellogg W. (1977). Early blooming and late blooming syntactic structures. Evaluating writing: describing, measuring, judging, ed. by Charles R. Cooper & Lee Odell. Urbana: NCTE. pp.91–104.Google Scholar
  13. Morenberg, Max, Daiker, Donald, & Kerek, Andrew. (1978). Sentence combining at the college level: an experimental study. Research in the Teaching of English 12, 245–256.Google Scholar
  14. O’Donnell, Roy C., Griffin, William J. & Norris, Raymond C. (1967). Syntax of kindergarten and elementary school children: a transformational analysis. NCTE Research Report No. 8. Champaign: NCTE.Google Scholar
  15. Ong, Walter J. (1982) Orality and literacy: the technologizing of the word. New York: Methuen.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Page, Ellis B. (1966). The imminence of grading essays by computer. Phi Delta Kappan 47, 238–243.Google Scholar
  17. Page, Ellis B. (1968). The use of the computer in analyzing student essays. International review of education 14, 210–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Pendarvis, Edwina Dawn. (1983). A comparison of gifted students’ written language with the written language of average students. DAI 45, 150–A.Google Scholar
  19. Quinn, Dennis P. (1984). Rhetorical analysis of intellectual processes in student writing: linguistic cues in the quality-rated writing of college pre-freshmen. DAI 45, 2855–A.Google Scholar
  20. Steward, Murray F. (1978). Syntactic maturity from high school to university: a first look. Research in the Teaching of English 12, 37–46.Google Scholar
  21. Witte, Stephen P., & Faigley, Lester. (1981). Coherence, cohesion and writing quality. CCC 32, 189–204.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1990

Authors and Affiliations

  • Carl Mills
    • 1
  1. 1.University of CincinnatiCincinnatiUSA

Personalised recommendations