What Makes Your Writing Style Unique? Significant Differences Between Two Famous Romanian Orators

This paper introduces a novel, in-depth approach of analyzing the differences in writing style between two famous Romanian orators, based on automated textual complexity indices for Romanian language. The considered authors are: (a) Mihai Eminescu, Romania’s national poet and a remarkable journalist of his time, and (b) Ion C. Brătianu, one of the most important Romanian politicians from the middle of the 18th century. Both orators have a common journalistic interest consisting in their desire to spread the word about political issues in Romania via the printing press, the most important public voice at that time. In addition, both authors exhibit writing style particularities, and our aim is to explore these differences through our ReaderBench framework that computes a wide range of lexical and semantic textual complexity indices for Romanian and other languages. The used corpus contains two collections of speeches for each orator that cover the period 1857–1880. The results of this study highlight the lexical and cohesive textual complexity indices that reflect very well the differences in writing style, measures relying on Latent Semantic Analysis (LSA) and Latent Dirichlet Allocation (LDA) semantic models.

ReaderBench goes Online: A Comprehension-Centered Framework for Educational Purposes

In this paper we introduce the online version of our ReaderBench framework, which includes multi-lingual comprehension-centered web services designed to address a wide range of individual and collaborative learning scenarios, as follows. First, students can be engaged in reading a course material, then eliciting their understanding of it; the reading strategies component provides an in-depth perspective of comprehension processes. Second, students can write an essay or a summary; the automated essay grading component provides them access to more than 200 textual complexity indices covering lexical, syntax, semantics and discourse structure measurements. Third, students can start discussing in a chat or a forum; the Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL) component provides indepth conversation analysis in terms of evaluating each member’s involvement in the CSCL environments. Eventually, the sentiment analysis, as well as the semantic models and topic mining components enable a clearer perspective in terms of learner’s points of view and of underlying interests.