流派对谷歌翻译的影响——辅助二语写作输出质量

IF 4.6 1区 文学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Recall Pub Date : 2022-07-25 DOI:10.1017/S0958344022000143
Assim S. Alrajhi
{"title":"流派对谷歌翻译的影响——辅助二语写作输出质量","authors":"Assim S. Alrajhi","doi":"10.1017/S0958344022000143","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This study investigates and compares the quality of Google-translated texts (GTTs) across writing genres (narrative, descriptive, expository, and persuasive) with EFL student–generated texts (SGTs), and explores students’ attitudes toward Google Translate (GT) output. In a mixed-methods design with a computational approach to text analysis, this study utilizes multiple data sources, including 328 written texts, written reflections, four attitude questionnaires, focus group discussion, and individual interviews. Forty-one Arabic-speaking undergraduate students majoring in English language and translation at a Saudi university participated in this study. They engaged in eight computer-mediated writing sessions by responding to tasks using English, then responding to the same tasks using their first language (L1). Subsequently, they utilized GT to translate L1 texts into English and compared SGTs with GTTs. The findings show that GTTs have higher literacy levels and richer content in the persuasive and expository genres, and higher style levels in the narrative and descriptive genres. Moreover, the comparison between SGTs and GTTs reveals that GTTs have higher literacy levels, better style, and richer content in the descriptive, expository, and persuasive genres. Meanwhile, the students hold positive views on the general quality, grammatical accuracy, and provision of lexical alternatives in GTTs across genres. Pedagogical implications are discussed.","PeriodicalId":47046,"journal":{"name":"Recall","volume":"35 1","pages":"305 - 320"},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Genre effect on Google Translate–assisted L2 writing output quality\",\"authors\":\"Assim S. Alrajhi\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/S0958344022000143\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract This study investigates and compares the quality of Google-translated texts (GTTs) across writing genres (narrative, descriptive, expository, and persuasive) with EFL student–generated texts (SGTs), and explores students’ attitudes toward Google Translate (GT) output. In a mixed-methods design with a computational approach to text analysis, this study utilizes multiple data sources, including 328 written texts, written reflections, four attitude questionnaires, focus group discussion, and individual interviews. Forty-one Arabic-speaking undergraduate students majoring in English language and translation at a Saudi university participated in this study. They engaged in eight computer-mediated writing sessions by responding to tasks using English, then responding to the same tasks using their first language (L1). Subsequently, they utilized GT to translate L1 texts into English and compared SGTs with GTTs. The findings show that GTTs have higher literacy levels and richer content in the persuasive and expository genres, and higher style levels in the narrative and descriptive genres. Moreover, the comparison between SGTs and GTTs reveals that GTTs have higher literacy levels, better style, and richer content in the descriptive, expository, and persuasive genres. Meanwhile, the students hold positive views on the general quality, grammatical accuracy, and provision of lexical alternatives in GTTs across genres. Pedagogical implications are discussed.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47046,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Recall\",\"volume\":\"35 1\",\"pages\":\"305 - 320\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-07-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Recall\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0958344022000143\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Recall","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0958344022000143","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

摘要本研究调查并比较了不同写作类型(叙事、描述性、解释性和说服性)的谷歌翻译文本(GTT)与EFL学生生成文本(SGT)的质量,并探讨了学生对谷歌翻译输出的态度。在采用计算方法进行文本分析的混合方法设计中,本研究利用了多个数据来源,包括328篇书面文本、书面反思、四种态度问卷、焦点小组讨论和个人访谈。沙特一所大学英语语言与翻译专业的41名阿拉伯语本科生参与了这项研究。他们参与了八次计算机辅助写作,先用英语回答任务,然后用第一语言(L1)回答相同的任务。随后,他们利用GT将L1文本翻译成英语,并将SGT与GTT进行了比较。研究结果表明,GTT在说服性和阐释性文体中具有更高的识字水平和更丰富的内容,在叙事性和描述性文体中具有较高的风格水平。此外,SGT和GTT之间的比较表明,GTT在描述性、阐释性和说服性流派中具有更高的识字水平、更好的风格和更丰富的内容。同时,学生们对跨流派GTT的总体质量、语法准确性和词汇替代的提供持积极看法。讨论了教学意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Genre effect on Google Translate–assisted L2 writing output quality
Abstract This study investigates and compares the quality of Google-translated texts (GTTs) across writing genres (narrative, descriptive, expository, and persuasive) with EFL student–generated texts (SGTs), and explores students’ attitudes toward Google Translate (GT) output. In a mixed-methods design with a computational approach to text analysis, this study utilizes multiple data sources, including 328 written texts, written reflections, four attitude questionnaires, focus group discussion, and individual interviews. Forty-one Arabic-speaking undergraduate students majoring in English language and translation at a Saudi university participated in this study. They engaged in eight computer-mediated writing sessions by responding to tasks using English, then responding to the same tasks using their first language (L1). Subsequently, they utilized GT to translate L1 texts into English and compared SGTs with GTTs. The findings show that GTTs have higher literacy levels and richer content in the persuasive and expository genres, and higher style levels in the narrative and descriptive genres. Moreover, the comparison between SGTs and GTTs reveals that GTTs have higher literacy levels, better style, and richer content in the descriptive, expository, and persuasive genres. Meanwhile, the students hold positive views on the general quality, grammatical accuracy, and provision of lexical alternatives in GTTs across genres. Pedagogical implications are discussed.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Recall
Recall Multiple-
CiteScore
8.50
自引率
4.40%
发文量
17
期刊最新文献
Forty-two years of computer-assisted language learning research: A scientometric study of hotspot research and trending issues Different interlocutors, different EFL interactional strategies: A case study of intercultural telecollaborative projects in secondary classrooms Examining the relationships among motivation, informal digital learning of English, and foreign language enjoyment: An explanatory mixed-method study ReCALL editorial September 2023 issue Sampling and randomisation in experimental and quasi-experimental CALL studies: Issues and recommendations for design, reporting, review, and interpretation
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1