This study investigated how Korean high school students use English connectives in argumentative writing. The participants were 71 high school second year students. Analysis of data focused on three aspects of connective use: 1) the frequency and kinds of connectives used, 2) commonly used words in each category of connectives, and 3) frequently used positions of connectives. Considering the possible effect of topical knowledge and general English ability, the analysis included the comparison between two topic groups and between two language ability groups. The results showed there was a high similarity between different topic groups and ability groups in the use of connectives, but a significant difference was also found in some limited features. Based on the results, the study concludes that Korean high school students, regardless of the writing topic and language ability, share common features in the use of English connectives. Some suggestions are made for further research and writing instruction.

Although the use of Grammatical Metaphor (GM) has been regarded as one of the representative features of academic writing in the framework of Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL), not many studies have explored its role in second or foreign language writers’ writing quality. This study aimed to discover the potential relationship between GM development and argumentative writing quality of advanced Korean EFL learners, while controlling for their overall language proficiency and reading comprehension ability. The findings from this study unveiled significant contribution of the use of both premature and mature GM and also identified transcategorization as the specific GM that has relatively stronger predictability of writing quality. The results from current research yield meaningful pedagogical implications for writing instruction in Korean EFL contexts.

The purpose of this study is to examine the effects of task complexity on the quality of L2 learners’ argumentative writing using both global measures of complexity, accuracy, and fluency (CAF) and task-specific measures, namely, for conjunctions. A group of 110 Korean high school students in South Korea performed either a simple or complex argumentative writing task. Task complexity was manipulated by +/–reasoning demands and +/–few elements. A set of 110 argumentative essays were analyzed on 6 global measures of CAF and 2 task-specific measures. The results showed that task complexity affected the fluency of the argumentative writings, in that the complex task group produced more fluent writings than the simple group. However, task complexity did not affect accuracy or syntactic complexity of the argumentative writings. In the task-specific measures, task complexity affected neither frequency nor target-like use of conjunctions. These results have pedagogical implications for task design to help learners develop their L2 proficiency.

Despite previous research on the use of the first-person pronoun in academic writing, it has rarely been studied in L2 writing and learner corpus research. In this study, the pronoun I was analyzed and compared between native speaking (NS) and Korean nonnative speaking (NNS) corpora of English argumentative writing samples. To identify differences in its discourse functions, three categories (essay commentator, experience provider and opinion provider) were formulated. The findings show that the normalized frequency of the pronoun was higher in the learner corpus. However, the pronoun occurred less frequently within individual essays but was found in more essays. Unlike the NS corpus, the opinion provider occurs more frequently than the experience provider in the learner corpus. For the opinion provider, Korean students usually selected the verb think. The present study suggests the need to develop students’ awareness of the discursive usage of the pronoun and expand their repertoire of metadiscursive devices.