L1 and L2 writers share a core set of high-frequency connectives but with strikingly different frequencies, and is nearly three times more frequent in L1 essays¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associationalr2·q2
Currency · newest study 2015 · checked against its sources 2026-10-20 (automated, 1 of 1 entry) · not reviewed by a person · overdue for a recheck since 2020: baselines and conditions change
Subclaims¶
Reading the evidence codes
q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r
the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.
This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.
q2 i? and, but, because, so, however and therefore occur among the top 10 most frequently used devices of both L1 and L2 writers, although with strikingly different frequencies. → Hu 2015
q2 i? The greatest difference is and, which appears nearly three times more often in the L1 sample than in the Hong Kong and Singaporean L2 samples. → Hu 2015
Evidence¶
Hu 2015¶
Hu, C., & Li, Y. (2015). Discourse Connectives in L1 and L2 Argumentative Writing. Higher Education Studies. https://doi.org/10.5539/hes.v5n4p30
q2 · i? · the article prints no effect size for this finding · associational · r2
Quantitative profile from Table 4 of the top ten DCs in each of the four sub-corpora, generated with Wordsmith Tools 5.0. The article reports "considerable similarities of usage" across groups with "strikingly different frequencies", and that and is "nearly three times more often in L1 sample than in L2 sample by Hong Kong and Singaporean students".
"there are considerable similarities of usage, with and, but, because, so, however and therefore occurring among the top 10 most frequently used devices of both L1 and L2 writers, although with strikingly different frequencies. The greatest difference is and (nearly three times more often in L1 sample than in L2 sample by Hong Kong and Singaporean students)."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- The connective and is multifunctional in L1 essays, functioning as resultive and other relations, which may explain its lower frequency in L2 writing — related
- Contrastive rhetoric overgeneralizes shared culture and ignores individual differences among L2 writers — related
- Hong Kong students overuse enumerating, resultive and summative discourse connectives relative to L1, Singaporean and Thai writers — related
- Hong Kong and Singaporean students are more formal in tone than L1 and Thai students when using adversative and resultive connectives — related
- Hong Kong and Singaporean L2 students underuse discourse connectives overall compared with L1 writers, while Thai students do not differ significantly — related
- L2 writers tend to overuse more discourse connectives than they underuse, and both L1 and L2 students have a limited range of DCs at their disposal — related
- Thai students overuse the causal connective because, a pattern the article attributes to L1 influence — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
shared-top-dcs-different-frequencies |
title |
L1 and L2 writers share a core set of high-frequency connectives but with strikingly different frequencies, and is nearly three times more frequent in L1 essays |
description |
L1 and L2 writers share a core set of high-frequency connectives but with strikingly different frequencies, and is nearly three times more frequent in L1 essays |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2015 |
source_checked |
2026-10-20 |
recheck_by |
2020 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-09-26 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — hu-2015 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.