Syntactical Success

Correlations between Syntactic Complexity and Success within the Genre of Chick Lit

Word Count: 5,128

Introduction

Considering that writing is the most efficient way to communicate across spans of both

time and space, there’s logically a large amount of information surrounding the science of

writing. However, despite all of the research within the field of literature, very little research has

been conducted regarding whether there is a correlation between syntactic complexity at the

clausal level and perception and, by extent, popularity, of works of popular fiction under the

genre of Chick Lit, which, in Subordination as a potential marker of complexity in serious and

popular fiction: a corpus stylistic approach to the testing of literary critical claims, was simply

categorized and selected on a basis of “particular book covers, female authors and female

readers” (Montoro & McIntyre, 2018).

Recently, scholars have focused on syntactic complexity analysis that could be applied to

education, so a decent amount of literature in this study focuses on academics. While this

research is essential to ensure that new English learners can gain a solid understanding of the

English, it leaves gaps in research regarding syntactic complexity by neglecting to address other

ways syntactic complexity can be applied to literature, such as in the market. This research

attempts to address this gap by using syntactic complexity analysis at the clausal level to identify

indices of syntactic complexity that exhibit any correlation with the popularity of a work of

Chick Lit.

Lit Review

Perception is one of the most important things in literature. For L2 learners, the

perception of their work from their human reader is a large portion of their grade. In the study

Does writing development equal writing quality? A computational investigation of syntactic

complexity in L2 learners, the two professors found that clausal structure was the only predictor

of high human evaluation of a paper (Crossley & McNamara, 2014). Similarly, in What

Linguistic Features Are Indicative of Writing Quality? A Case of Argumentative Essays in a

College Composition Program, subordinating conjunctions at the clausal level were used to

identify more proficient writing, creating overlapping agreement between the effect of

complexity at the clausal level and human perception of proficiency, which is why this study will

be focusing on syntactic complexity at the clausal level because of its greater impact on human

perception (Crawford, Taguchi, & Wetzel, 2013; Crossley & McNamara, 2014). Subordination

was a popular method of determining complexity for many studies, and was also used in

“Different topics, different discourse: Relationships among writing topic, measures of syntactic

complexity, and judgments of writing quality”, which found that finite subordination had a

positive relationship with writing quality in L2 classrooms (Lu, Yang, Weigle, 2015).

As stated before, subordination is a common predictor of proficiency in L2 writing, but,

since this study focuses on fiction, the inclusion of studies analyzing such would be useful. The

disproportionate amount of work regarding syntactic complexity and its effects on perception

that are education focused, while justified in the importance of education, are slightly alarming

compared to the relative lack of analysis regarding the analysis of syntactic complexity in the

market of professional writing, which will be represented in this study by the genre of Chick Lit.

Despite the apparent lack of research on professional fiction, a few studies have been found to

have focused their analysis on popular fiction. One, for instance, provided a basis for this study,

as it examined the difference in syntactic complexity between serious fiction and popular fiction.

It does so similarly to the previous studies by using the presence of subordination at the clausal

level to detect complexity and perception. The study Subordination as a potential marker of
complexity in serious and popular fiction: a corpus stylistic approach to the testing of literary

critical claims attempts to test an assumption that serious fiction is more complex than popular

fiction, specifically, the genre of Chick Lit. Though it is unable to explicitly confirm rumors that

popular fiction is less syntactically complex than serious fiction, as the researchers state “These

results suggest that fictional dialogue, irrespective of its high or lowbrow status is more

syntactically complex (in the sense defined in this paper) than spoken language”, the study does

suggest that Chick Lit may have gained popularity from its simplicity. According to the studies

citation of “unprompted online opinions” from “devoted blogs and book-club forums”, it is less

linguistically complex than serious fiction. The researchers include statements from said sources

to back this claim: “I have to admit to being a chick-lit fan and I'm proud of it. I know they're not

the most intellectual books on the market but I like them because they're easy to read and more

often than not are fluffy and light-hearted". From this excerpt, along with others, the researchers

suggested that “Linguistic simplicity, therefore, would appear to be as much an expectation held

by the readership as a defining characteristic of the genre often picked up by critics.” This may

be a marketing strategy for authors of Chick Lit, as the same study also states “one... difference

between popular and serious fiction is the fact that the former pay heed to marketability concerns

much more than the latter” (Montoro & McIntyre, 2018).

Such quotes, when compared to ones from A Corpus-Based Evaluation of Syntactic

Complexity Measures as Indices of College-Level ESL Writers’ Language Development, seem to

convey a negative relationship between the popularity of a novel and its syntactic complexity

features present at a clausal level, as the study states that syntactic complexity and sophistication

have a positive relationship. Similar views of syntactic complexity appear in Syntactic

Complexity Measures and their Relationship to L2 Proficiency: A Research Synthesis of

College‐level L2 Writing and Does writing development equal writing quality? A computational

investigation of syntactic complexity in L2 learners, which ultimately conveys that syntactic

complexity is sophistication of syntax (Ortega, 2003; Crossley & McNamara, 2014). Compared

to the importance of linguistic simplicity proposed by Montoro and McIntyre, it seems that there

is a somewhat negative relationship between the popularity of a work of Chick Lit specifically

and the syntactic complexity of that work. However, before establishing the strength of this

hypothesis, limitations in the existing research and in this study must be addressed, as failing to

do so could lead to misleading or invalid results.

Despite the evidence supporting the importance of clausal indices of syntactic complexity

compared to all others, Measuring Syntactic Complexity in L2 Writing Using Fine-Grained

Clausal and Phrasal Indices suggested that the “disproportionate focus on large grained clause

units have been misplaced, especially in academic writing...” (Crossley and Kyle, 2018).

However, in, Subordination as a potential marker of complexity in serious and popular fiction: a

corpus stylistic approach to the testing of literary critical claims, a statement is made regarding

syntactic complexity is fiction, stating that conversation and fiction have “a high frequency of

verbs, hence also of clause and clause combinations” (Biber et al., 1999:93, as cited in Montoro

& McIntyre, 2018). This creates a defense for the use of clausal indices for the analysis of

syntactic complexity of popular fiction. This, however, is not the only limit that must be

addressed in this research. A much more influential one lies in the defining, categorizing, a

collecting of data.

Categorizing the genre of popular fiction known as Chick Lit is a bit difficult, as,

according to Subordination as a potential marker of complexity in serious and popular fiction: a

corpus stylistic approach to the testing of literary critical claims, “the subcategories [genres] are
not comprehensively discrete, that is, there are no fool proof criteria to define the sub-genres as

unequivocally distinctive from one another” (McIntyre and Montoro, 2018). Without strict

guidelines for differentiating between the subcategories of fiction, there may be discrepancies in

what is Chick Lit and what is not. This limitation was slightly more alarming than the last, as

according to the study above, Chick Lit is characterized by different measures of syntactic

complexity than other subgenres like fantasy and science fiction, which include “Intrusive and

over-long passages of exposition... needless repetition of adjectives and adverbs... a dependence

on third person omniscient narration; dialogue that is too complex syntactically to convincingly

represent talk; and a tendency to use unnatural synonyms for the speech reporting verb ‘said’,

and to modify those synonyms with equally unnatural adverbs” (Mandala, 2010: 16-17, as cited

in McIntyre and Montoro, 2019). This limitation was addressed through the familiarization of the

works selected to be analyzed.

With the understanding in the negative relationship between linguistic simplicity and

syntactic complexity, the proposed hypothesis of this research is that works with a relatively

moderate level of syntactic complexity will have better reviews compared to syntactic

complexity levels both lower and higher than the works of moderate complexity. As there is a

lack of research regarding the perception of syntactic complexity in a work and how it could

affect the popularity of that work within the genre of Chick Lit, this article will aim to address

that gap.

Methods

In order to identify any correlations between syntactical complexity at the clausal level

and popularity in genre fiction, several elements of syntactical structure have been considered

alongside book data consisting of publication data, publisher, language, author publicity, and
genre, and other important information that could have potentially impacted popularity. For the

control of the text samples being used for this study, only books published in English originally

and published after 2000 were considered. And, as mentioned in the Literature Review, only

works falling under or close to the genre of Chick Lit were considered. Samples were taken from

designated areas of text, all of which were near the beginning of the work, and no sample

consisted of more than 1000 words because of the limitations of the L2 Syntactic Complexity

Analyzer: Single Mode. The L2 Syntactic Complexity Analyzer: Single Mode is the software

being used to analyze the works selected in this study and was created by Haiyang Ai, a research

professor at the University of Cincinnati.

This content analysis utilized computer software to analyze the syntactical complexity of

several works. Though some may think that a computational analysis of syntactic complexity

would result in discrepancy of data, the study Does writing development equal writing quality?

A computational investigation of syntactic complexity in L2 learners found that automated

syntactic complexity analysis was more accurate in presenting indices than human readers were

(Crossley & McNamara, 2014). This conclusion was also addressed in the Literature Review, as

a human reader’s ability to identify indices of syntactic complexity were important for deciding

the focus of the study (clausal structure). However, simply because one software found more

indices of syntactic complexity than human readers does not automatically mean that another

software will yield the same results. In the study Automatic analysis of syntactic complexity in

second language writing, Xiaofei Lu defends the use of computation systems for the analysis of

syntactic complexity, stating that the system being used in this study “achieves very high

reliability on unseen test data from the corpus.” The fourteen indices of syntactic complexity

evaluated in this software are also defended, as Lu states that they were selected from another
large-scale research synthesis on the topic. Lu explains the five categories the indices were

sorted into and the reasoning behind the selected indices.

The first type consists of three measures that gauge length of production at the

clausal, sentential, or T-unit level, namely, mean length of clause (MLC), mean

length of sentence (MLS), and mean length of T-unit (MLT). The second type

consists of a sentence complexity ratio (clauses per sentence, or C/S). The 6 third

type comprises four ratios that reflect the amount of subordination, including a T-

unit complexity ratio (clauses per T-unit, or C/T), a complex T-unit ratio i.e.

complex nominals per clause (CN/C), complex nominals per T-unit (CN/T), and

verb phrases per T-unit (VP/T) (Lu, 2010). (complex T-units per T-unit, or CT/T),

a dependent clause ratio (dependent clauses per clause, or DC/C), and dependent

clauses per T-unit (DC/T). The fourth type is made up of three ratios that measure

the amount of coordination, namely, coordinate phrases per clause (CP/C),

coordinate phrases per T-unit (CP/T), and a sentence coordination ratio (T-units

per sentence, or T/S). The fifth and final type consists of three ratios that consider

the relationship between particular syntactic structures and larger production

units,

Out of these categories, those responsible for analysis of clausal level, and ratios

reflecting the amount of subordination, will be used. The L2 Syntactic Complexity Analyzer:

Single Mode software was chosen for its effectiveness in these categories and its availability. In

order to maintain the validity of results, however, every other aspect of this study must be

selective. One very important aspect of this research is the novels chosen for analysis. In the

Literature Review, the reasoning for selecting the genre of Chick Lit was introduced. One of the
reasons for it was because there is an implied connection between the syntactic complexity of

Chick Lit and how readers perceive it, which would have directly affected its popularity. Be that

as it may, the genre of Chick Lit has no clear delineation to make it a distinct genre, which was

also addressed in the Literature Review. For this reason, the process of selecting the fifteen

works for analysis was slightly troublesome, as very few works are explicitly labeled Chick Lit.

Out of the original fifteen selected for analysis, several were found to be more aligned with other

genres of fiction or did not meet the publication requirements for this study, such as date of

publication.

After a work was found to be suitable, an excerpt from the beginning of the book was

selected and the excerpt, no more than 1,000, was manually typed into the computer. The reason

for this was to ensure the accuracy of the work, as not all online materials were reputable, and,

because of the recent publication of the works, digital copies did not always exist with easy

access. Because of the limitations in availability and the process required to make the data

usable, the sample size remained relatively small for this research. Rocio Montoro used a similar

sample size of 10 works when analyzing the covers of Chick Lit novels in order to identify how

“semiotic resources such as, for instance, colour, typography and general layout are exploited”

(2012), as did Dan McIntyre and Montoro in Subordination as a potential marker of complexity

in serious and popular fiction: a corpus stylistic approach to the testing of literary critical

claims, using a sample size of six works of chick lit for their analysis (2018).

Once completed, the excerpts were copied into the L2 Syntactic Complexity Analyzer:

Single Mode software. Because data regarding all aspects, regardless of selection appear

numerically, there is no need to select any specific aspects for analysis. Simply selecting one is

fine. When possible, use the mouse to select “Analyze”. A table and a list of aspects and
numbers should appear, separated by commas. While the tables difference in scale makes it

difficult to read or use, the raw numbers can either be imported to an excel document or the

specific aspects being looked for can be recorded and placed into an excel document. In order to

accurately associate the correct data with the aspect it corresponds to, the following information

is given:

Data for all 23 selection options will be shown in the list (while 14 aspects for this study

are listed in Automatic analysis of syntactic complexity in second language writing, other data,

such as word count and number of sentences, is also recorded and displayed). The abbreviations

of the aspects of data collected are listed first. After all aspects are listed, 23 numbers are listed,

separated by commas. Each number corresponds with the aspect it is equivalent in order to. That

is, the first number listed is the data for the first aspect listed, the second number for the second

aspect listed, and so on.

The needed data from the categories of Mean Length of Sentences, Mean Length of T-

Units, Mean Length of Clauses, Clause per T-Unit ratio, Dependent Clause per T-Unit Ratio,

Complex T-Unit per T-Unit ratio, and Dependent Clause per Clause ratio was copied into an

excel spreadsheet, sorted into columns based on aspect, and into rows that corresponded with the

work being analyzed. After collecting the data for the syntactic complexity of the works, data

needs to be collected on the popularity of the 7 works.

This was done by finding ratings of the works from the online websites of LibraryThing

and Goodreads. Though it was not the main focus of the paper, something similar was done in

Subordination as a potential marker of complexity in serious and popular fiction: a corpus

stylistic approach to the testing of literary critical claims. In the study, a corpus constructed by

Professor Montoro includes online opinions of works of Chick Lit published in “specifically
devoted blogs and book club forums”, quotes from which are listed in the Literature Review

(2018). Though individual quotes and qualitative reviews will not be used in this study, the

numerical reviews will be, as well as the numerical rank for popularity on LibraryThing, as that

is also an indicator of how well known and well received a work is.

Regarding the use of LibraryThing and Goodreads, it is important to consider and

important limitation when using these sites. As Lala Hajibayova finds in Investigation of

Goodreads’ reviews: Kakutanied, deceived or simply honest? book reviews on Goodreads

“might be interpreted as reviewers’ attempts to market their reviews and influence readers’

cultural consumption and overall cultural production”. While a review is not the same as the

ratings being used, it is important to consider the possibility of the ratings not being as genuine

as hoped. However, because the popularity data collected from Goodreads and LibraryThing will

be used relatively to compare sample works to other sample works and find correlations, the data

will still be used as it is still useful and applicable. Since LibraryThing lacks support of its

credibility, ratings from it will have less weight. The analysis of syntactic complexity is the main

focus of this study.

Once the data regarding the syntactic complexity was collected, along with the rating data

from Goodreads and LibraryThing, the data was placed in separate excel tables based on theme

(Mean Length, ratio regarding clauses, etc.). After this, scatter plots were created using the insert

chart function in Excel to better illustrate the connection between data sets and to provide

understandable graphical representations of the data that could be easily interpreted, while the

separation of data based on theme was done to keep the scales accurate so that data would not be

misunderstood because of the scale. These charts are included in Appendixes A and B. Overall,

the methodology of this study compared indices of syntactic complexity at a clausal level with
how well received a work was based on reviews, which has allowed for the analysis of

correlations between syntactic complexity at the clausal level and popularity in Chick Lit.

Results, Products, or Findings

As mentioned in the methodology, Microsoft Excel was used to create visual aids to help

better understand the data. However, because of the limited space available in charts, the key is

numerical. The following chart displays what numbers correspond to what works. This key will

be effective throughout the paper unless otherwise stated.

# shown on tables and Title of the work it corresponds to

charts
1 The Lemonade Year
2 Rosie Colored Glasses
3 The Violets of March
4 Intercepted
5 The Woman Who Stole My Life
6 Kissing Adrien
7 A Palm Beach Wife
Figure 1 shows the numerical codes that correspond to the Chick Lit work being analyzed.

The following data was collected in regard to syntactic complexity and popularity. In

order to answer the research question, the data on syntactic complexity will be individually

compared to the popularity data so correlations between high popularity and syntactic

performance can be found.

Data regarding popularity is listed below. The chart displays the ratings from Goodreads

and LibraryThing, while the table displays both the ratings and the number of ratings of the

works.

LibraryThing
LibraryThing # Goodreads # Ratings (out Goodreads Rating
Book of Ratings of Ratings of 5) (out of 5)
 1 2 481 3 3.26
2 11 1,561 3.8 3.76
3 68 23,448 3.73 3.82
4 10 8,795 3.87 3.77
5 13 1,886 3.32 3.56
6 4 1,074 3.85 3.87
7 3 630 3.67 2.72
Figure 2 displays the data regarding the ratings of each of the works on Goodreads and LibraryThing,

along with the number of ratings for each site.

Figure 3 also displays the ratings from both Goodreads and LibraryThing, as a scatterplot.

As shown, the number of ratings on Goodreads far surpasses LibraryThing, which is why

Goodreads ratings were worth more in determining relative popularity. While the graph displays

the ratings from both websites, the table provides important information regarding the number of

ratings given to each book. The number of ratings also contributes the popularity of the work for

this study, as it increases accuracy and roughly displays the following of a work.

The first three indices of syntactic complexity that were analyzed were Mean Length of

Sentences, Mean Length of T-Units, and Mean Length of Clauses. The chart and table below

display the data found on these indices.

Book Title MLS MLT MLC

 1 13.4605 11.7586 7.6917

2 12.7973 14.1343 8.934

3 12.439 11.7241 7.5
4 12.3671 11.3605 8.0082
5 18.1071 16.0952 9.3889
6 12.9359 11.7326 8.5508
7 12.8354 12.5185 9.3028
Figure 4 displays the data collected from the L2 Syntactic Complexity Analyzer: Single Mode for all 7

works, regarding the Mean Length of Clauses, T-Units, and Sentences.

Figure 5 displays the data from Figure 4 as a scatterplot.

When compared to the data on popularity, it was found that there was a slight correlation

between this data and popularity. Having a low mean length of sentences, mean length of

clauses, and mean length of T-Units was found to have a slight correlation with high popularity.

However, popularity can be impacted by other aspects (i.e., plot, author, etc.), so there were

some anomalies. For instance, Rosie Colored Glasses (number 2) had a high Mean Length of T-

Units, and its Mean Length of Clauses was a high average, and despite this, it had relatively high

popularity. The Lemonade Year also showed some inconsistency, as it had a very low Mean

Length of Clauses but was still rather unpopular. On the opposite end of this, low popularity
seemed to be correlated with having a high average Mean Length of sentences, and high average

Mean Length of T-Units, and a high Mean Length of Clauses.

The next set of figures shows the Data collected on the ratio of Clauses to T-Units,

Dependent Clauses to T-Units, and Complex T-Units to T-Units.

Book

Title C/T DC/T CT/T

1 1.5287 0.5057 0.3793
2 1.5821 0.6119 0.4478
3 1.5632 0.5402 0.4138
4 1.4186 0.4767 0.3953
5 1.7143 0.5556 0.4127
6 1.3721 0.4186 0.4302
7 1.3457 0.3580 0.2716
Figure 6 displays data collected from the L2 Syntactic Complexity Analyzer: Single Mode for all 7 works

and the ratios comparing the number of Clauses, Dependent Clauses, and Complex T-Units to T-Units.

Figure 7 displays the data from Figure 6 as a scatterplot

High popularity was correlated with having an average Clause to T-Unit Ratio, a high

average Dependent Clause to T-Unit ratio, and a high average Dependent Clause to Clause ratio.
Of course, anomalies also exist in this part of the analysis. Intercepted (number 4) had a low

average Clause to T-Unit ratio, a low average Dependent Clause to T-Unit ratio, and a low

average Complex T-Unit to T-Unit ratio, despite having high popularity within the sample. Rosie

Colored Glasses also did not follow this trend completely, as it had a high Dependent Clause to

T-Unit Ratio, and a high Complex T-Unit to T-Unit ratio despite its performance in the

popularity sector. Indicators of low popularity within the sample were having a low Clause to T-

Unit ratio, a low Dependent Clause to T-Unit ratio, and a low Complex T-Unit to T-Unit ratio.

Figures 8 and 9 show the tables for the ratios of Dependent Clauses to clauses in the works.

Book Title DC/C

1 0.3308
2 0.3868
3 0.3456
4 0.3361
5 0.3241
6 0.3051
7 0.2661
Figure 8 displays data from the L2 Syntactic Complexity Analyzer: Single Mode that displays the ratio

comparing the number of Dependent Clauses to Clauses.

Figure 9 displays the data from Figure 8 in a scatterplot.

 The analysis displayed a correlation between high popularity and a high average

Dependent Clause to Clause ratio. As visible in the chart, Rosie Colored Glasses had a rather

high Dependent Clause to Clause ratio, again creating an anomaly.

Discussion

Limited Influence of Syntactic Complexity

Multiple limitations exist regarding the research and findings of this paper, but the most

apparent and influential would be the limited influence syntactic complexity has on reader

perception. While syntactic complexity did have correlations with reader perception, many other

aspects of a work can influence how well a reader liked it, such as plot, characters, ideas, etc.

Therefore, the popularity of these works cannot be completely accredited to their syntactic

complexity.

Use of Computer Analysis Software

There is also a limitation in how the data was collected. Syntactical data collection relied

on the use of the L2 Syntactic Complexity Analyzer: Single Mode, which could make small

mistakes, as mentioned in Automatic analysis of syntactic complexity in second language

writing, though the system “achieves a high degree of reliability”, parsing errors “involving

attachment level and conjunction scope” could cause errors in analysis (Lu, 2010). Of course,

those errors would be marginal and without much impact, but this creates a small limitation of

the data collected overall.

Use of Goodreads and LibraryThing

 Lastly, there are limitations in the information coming from the primary sources in this

paper, such as Goodreads, LibraryThing, and the works that were analyzed. While the credibility

of Goodreads and LibraryThing was analyzed in the methods, it is still important to address the

limitation created by the use of such data. The data was used as an indication of relative

popularity, and while not every rating would have been an accurate depiction of how the work

was perceived, as Investigation of Goodreads’ reviews: Kakutanied, deceived or simply honest?

finds, the ratings with a high amount of user input would be generally reliable (Hajibayova,

2019). Ratings with very small amounts of user input speak for themselves regarding popularity,

as the number of ratings can also be used to determine the relative popularity of a work. With the

use of multiple sources and methods of determining popularity, the data collected regarding

popularity should be reliable enough to draw viable conclusions when paired with other data.

Categorization of Chick Lit

The other aspect of primary data collected lies in the works analyzed. While some

precautions were taken to ensure the accuracy of the text samples being analyzed, there is the

limitation created because of the “not comprehensively discrete” categorization of genres, as

discussed by Dan McIntyre and Rocio Montoro in the literature review, which may have affected

the genre of the work being analyzed (2018). The most obvious case of this within the sample

would be Rosie Colored Glasses, which turned out to be a much darker and deeper work,

contrary to stereotypical Chick Lit, which normally consists of light reads. Remembering that

Chick Lit gains part of its appeal from syntactically simple, this becomes a more concerning

development, as the role syntactic complexity plays in reader perception can change depending

on preference and genre. For this reason, the analysis regarding the popularity and syntactic

complexity of Rosie Colored Glasses will only be considered for the purpose of establishing that
the findings of this research are only applicable to Chick Lit. Rosie Colored Glasses provides a

perfect basis for establishing this, as the correlations found in the research were disrupted by the

analysis data of Rosie Colored Glasses (Wolfson, 2018), as reviewed in the Results section of

this paper.

These limitations considered, implications can still be derived from the research. To

answer the question “To what extent is the syntactic complexity of a work on the clausal level

correlated to the popularity of the said work?”, data on popularity and syntactic complexity was

collected and analyzed. The hypothesis presented in this paper proposed that works of moderate

syntactic complexity would be the most popular, as Chick Lit is well known and liked for

syntactic simplicity and readability, but a lack of any syntactic complexity often leads to

boredom. The data showed that works with average ratios regarding the comparison of the

number of Clauses and T-Units to number of T-Units, Complex T-Units, and Dependent Clauses

and low Mean Lengths of Sentences, T-Units, and Clauses had relatively higher popularity than

other works. Works with a moderately high to high Mean Length of Sentences, T-Units and

Clauses and low ratios regarding the comparison of the number of Clauses to the number of T-

Units, Complex T-Units, and Dependent Clauses had relatively low popularity compared to the

rest of the sample. Since having a higher ratio of such constructs suggests high syntactic

complexity, the data collected regarding the ratios seems to confirm the hypothesis. However,

there are several ways to interpret how the Mean Length of Sentences, T-Units, and Clauses

affect syntactic complexity. The accuracy of these methods would be dependent upon the

number of T-Units compared to the number of Sentences, and how the Mean Length of each of

them compared to the shortest and longest sample for each unit. However, having a low Mean

Length of Sentences and a Low Mean Length of T-Units would most likely be an indication of
low to moderate syntactic complexity. Having a low Mean Length of Sentences, T-Units, and

Clauses was a common trend in the works of higher popularity in this study, so it seems that

having low to moderate syntactic complexity is correlated with high popularity, as far as the

sample suggests. And while there are limitations to the implications of this data, the trends

presented by the analysis are both relatively consistent and obvious enough that they can be

assumed to be reliable enough to sufficiently answer the question: “Within the genre of Chick Lit

and regarding syntactic complexity at the clausal level, what correlations between syntactic

complexity at the beginning of a work and the popularity of said work can be found?”

Conclusion and Future Directions

According to the conclusions drawn from this research, there is a correlation between

syntactic complexity and the popularity of works of Chick Lit. There are obvious correlations

between high popularity and low Mean Length of Sentences, low mean Length of Clauses, and

low Mean Length of T-Units. Having a moderate ratio of Clauses per T-Unit was associated with

high popularity, as was having a moderately high Dependent Clause per T-Unit Ratio, and

moderately high Complex T-Unit to T-Unit Ratio, and a moderately high Dependent Clause per

Clause ratio. All correlations ultimately indicate low to moderate syntactic complexity, which

allows for the conclusion that low to moderate syntactic complexity within the genre of Chick

Lit is associated with high popularity. This information could be useful to authors of Chick Lit or

whose works would appeal to readers of Chick Lit, as it could be used to determine a style of

writing that would appeal to this audience. As the quotes from Subordination as a potential

marker of complexity in serious and popular fiction: A corpus stylistic approach to the testing of

literary critical claims indicate, Chick Lit is appealing partially because it is syntactically simple
and easy to read. These findings align with the claims made by Chick Lit readers and researchers

Montoro and McIntyre, as their study states “Linguistic simplicity, therefore, would appear to be

as much an expectation held by the readership as a defining characteristic of the genre often

picked up by critics” (2018). Some areas for future research in this study would include a larger

scale analysis of many more works of Chick Lit in order to produce more reliable results, and

perhaps the analysis of syntactic complexity and popularity in other genres, such as suspense,

romance, sci-fi, or fantasy. The analysis of Rosie Colored Glasses, a work mistaken for Chick

Lit, opened doors regarding how perceptions based on syntactic complexity might differ from

genre to genre. Rosie Colored Glasses, now found to be domestic fiction, followed none of the

trends held by works of Chick Lit. An analysis that goes beyond the genre of Chick Lit would

lead to a better understanding of syntactic complexity for authors of all genres, and possibly a

more efficient literature market.

 Bibliography

Ai, H. (2010). L2 Syntactic Complexity Analyzer: Single Mode [Computer software]. Retrieved

April 14, 2021, from https://aihaiyang.com/software/l2sca/single/

A Palm Beach Wife. Goodreads.com. Accessed April 19, 2021.

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/39863200-a-palm-beach-wife?

ac=1&from_search=true&qid=e0HuWDwbbP&rank=1

A Palm Beach Wife. LibraryThing.com. Accessed April 19, 2021.

https://www.librarything.com/work/22304220

Crossley, S. A., & McNamara, D. S. (2014). Does writing development equal writing quality? A

computational investigation of syntactic complexity in L2 learners. Journal of Second

Language Writing, 26, 66-79. doi:10.1016/j.jslw.2014.09.006

Hajibayova, L. (2019). Investigation of Goodreads’ reviews: Kakutanied, deceived or simply

honest? Journal of Documentation, 75(3), 612-626. doi:10.1108/jd-07-2018-0104

Intercepted. Goodreads.com. Accessed April 19, 2021.

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/37585029-intercepted?

ac=1&from_search=true&qid=1hxlbqKJhJ&rank=1

Intercepted. LibraryThing.com. Accessed April 19, 2021.

https://www.librarything.com/work/21936366

Jio, S. (2011). The Violets of March. London: Orion.

Keyes, M. (2014). The woman who stole my life. London: Penguin Books.
Kissing Adrien. Goodreads.com. Accessed April 19, 2021.

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/906105.Kissing_Adrien?

ac=1&from_search=true&qid=ClwCBh89in&rank=1

Kissing Adrien. LibraryThing.com. Accessed April 19, 2021.

https://www.librarything.com/work/161348

Kyle, K., & Crossley, S. A. (2018). Measuring Syntactic Complexity in L2 Writing Using Fine-

Grained Clausal and Phrasal Indices. The Modern Language Journal, 102(2), 333-349.

doi:10.1111/modl.12468

Lu, X. (2010). Automatic analysis of syntactic complexity in second language writing.

International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 15(4), 474-496. doi: 10.1075/ijcl.15.4.02lu

Lu, X. (2011). A Corpus-Based Evaluation of Syntactic Complexity Measures as Indices of

College-Level ESL Writers’ Language Development. Tesol Quarterly, 45(1), 36-62.

doi:10.5054/tq.2011.240859

Marren, S. (2019). Palm Beach Wife. St. Martins Press.

Martin, A. (2018). Intercepted. New York: Berkley.

Mitchell, S. L. (2005). Kissing Adrien. Eugene, OR: Harvest House.

Montoro, R. (2012). Chick Lit: The Stylistics of Cappuccino Fiction. London: Bloomsbury

Academic.

Montoro, R., & McIntyre, D. (2018). Subordination as a potential marker of complexity in

serious and popular fiction: A corpus stylistic approach to the testing of literary critical

claims. Corpora, 14(3), 275-299. doi:10.3366/cor.2019.0175

Ortega, L. (2003). Syntactic Complexity Measures and their Relationship to L2 Proficiency: A

Research Synthesis of College-level L2 Writing. Applied Linguistics, 24(4), 492-518.

doi:10.1093/applin/24.4.492

Pearsall, J., & Trumble, B. (1996). The Oxford English reference dictionary (2nd ed.). Oxford,

England: New York.

Rosie Colored Glasses. Goodreads.com. Accessed April 19, 2021.

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/34564829-rosie-colored-glasses?

from_search=true&from_srp=true&qid=gn3laTC1AP&rank=1

Rosie Colored Glasses. LibraryThing.com. Accessed April 19, 2021.

https://www.librarything.com/work/20204438

Taguchi, N., Crawford, W., & Wetzel, D. Z. (2013). What Linguistic Features Are Indicative of

Writing Quality? A Case of Argumentative Essays in a College Composition Program.

TESOL Quarterly, 47(2), 420-430. doi:10.1002/tesq.91

The Lemonade Year. Goodreads.com. Accessed April 19, 2021.

https://www.goodreads.com/search?utf8=%E2%9C%93&query=The+lemonade+year

The Lemonade Year. LibraryThing.com. Accessed April 19, 2021.

https://www.librarything.com/work/20552664

The Violets of March. Goodreads.com. Accessed April 19, 2021.

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/9724798-the-violets-of-march?

from_search=true&from_srp=true&qid=dUFM0xqzUx&rank=1
The Violets of March. LibraryThing.com. Accessed April 19, 2021.

https://www.librarything.com/work/10867557

The Woman Who Stole My Life. Goodreads.com. Accessed April 19, 2021.

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/22009741-the-woman-who-stole-my-life?

from_search=true&from_srp=true&qid=w1He9zZWae&rank=1

The Woman Who Stole My Life. LibraryThing.com. Accessed April 19, 2021.

https://www.librarything.com/work/15356334

Willoughby-Burle, A. (2018). The Lemonade Year: A novel. Salt Lake City, UT: Shadow

Mountain.

Wolfson, B. (2018). Rosie Colored Glasses. Toronto, Ontario, Canada: MIRA Books.

Yang, W., Lu, X., & Weigle, S. C. (2015). Different topics, different discourse: Relationships

among writing topic, measures of syntactic complexity, and judgments of writing quality.

Journal of Second Language Writing, 28, 53-67. doi:10.1016/j.jslw.2015.02.002

Appendix A

Data collected from LibraryThing and Goodreads

# shown on tables and Title of the work it corresponds to

charts
1 The Lemonade Year
2 Rosie Colored Glasses
3 The Violets of March
4 Intercepted
5 The Woman Who Stole My Life
6 Kissing Adrien
7 A Palm Beach Wife
Figure 1

LibraryThin LibraryThing
g # of Goodreads Ratings (out of Goodreads Rating (out
Book Title Ratings # of Ratings 5) of 5)
The Lemonade Year 2 481 3 3.26
Rosie Colored Glasses 11 1,561 3.8 3.76
The Violets of March 68 23,448 3.73 3.82
Intercepted 10 8,795 3.87 3.77
The Woman Who Stole
My Life 13 1,886 3.32 3.56
Kissing Adrien 4 1,074 3.85 3.87
A Palm Beach Wife 3 630 3.67 2.72

Figure 2
Figure 4

Book Title Goodreads # of Ratings LibraryThing # of Ratings

The Lemonade Year 481 2
Rosie Colored Glasses 1,561 11
The Violets of March 23,448 68
Intercepted 8,795 10
The Woman Who Stole My
Life 1,886 13
Kissing Adrien 1,074 4
A Palm Beach Wife 630 3
Figure 10 (Additional information not included in paper)
Figure 11 (Additional information not included in paper but referenced)
Appendix B

Data Collected Using the L2 Syntactic Complexity Analyzer: Single Mode

Figure 3

Book Title MLS MLT MLC

The Lemonade Year 13.4605 11.7586 7.6917
Rosie Colored Glasses 12.7973 14.1343 8.934
The Violets of March 12.439 11.7241 7.5
Intercepted 12.3671 11.3605 8.0082
The Woman Who Stole My
Life 18.1071 16.0952 9.3889
Kissing Adrien 12.9359 11.7326 8.5508
A Palm Beach Wife 12.8354 12.5185 9.3028
Figure 4 (modified)

Figure 5

Book Title C/T DC/T CT/T

The Lemonade Year 1.5287 0.5057 0.3793
Rosie Colored Glasses 1.5821 0.6119 0.4478
The Violets of March 1.5632 0.5402 0.4138
Intercepted 1.4186 0.4767 0.3953
The Woman Who Stole My Life 1.7143 0.5556 0.4127
Kissing Adrien 1.3721 0.4186 0.4302
 A Palm Beach Wife 1.3457 0.3580 0.2716
Figure 6 (modified)

Figure 7

Book Title DC/C

The Lemonade Year 0.3308
Rosie Colored Glasses 0.3868
The Violets of March 0.3456
Intercepted 0.3361
The Woman Who Stole My Life 0.3241
Kissing Adrien 0.3051
A Palm Beach Wife 0.2661
Figure 8 (modified)
Figure 9