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.

Assessing the effectiveness of machine translation in the Chinese EFL writing context: A replication of Lee (2020)

“…One possible explanation may lie in the mixture of different language pairs and text types. MT can produce higher style levels in descriptive genres (Alrajhi, 2022). However, no statistically significant difference was found in lexical diversity.…”

EFL Learners' Perceptions and Attitudinal Fluctuations Toward Digital Multimodal Composition

“…Following the final composing session, students (n = 38) engaged in concluding reflections, given that two students did not provide their reflections. The reflections allowed an open-ended opportunity for students to express their opinions (Alrajhi, 2022) on the DMC tasks. In week ten, a focus group discussion session was conducted by the researcher.…”

Investigating L2 Grammatical Accuracy in Digital Multimodal Writing

“…These sessions encompassed three TBW tasks for Group 1 and three DMW tasks for Group 2, with durations of approximately 40-45 and 55-60 minutes, respectively. To mitigate the potential effects of task type and genre (Alrajhi, 2023b) on grammatical accuracy, both TBW and DMW tasks were carried out on identical topics. Each writing session commenced with the students creating a new post on Blogger, where the assigned tasks were presented.…”