Skip to main content Accessibility help
Hostname: page-component-768ffcd9cc-s8fcc Total loading time: 0.276 Render date: 2022-12-03T00:36:43.598Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "useRatesEcommerce": false } hasContentIssue true

Article contents

Genre effect on Google Translate–assisted L2 writing output quality

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 July 2022

Assim S. Alrajhi*
Department of English Language and Translation, College of Arabic Language and Social Studies, Qassim University, Qassim, Saudi Arabia (


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.

Research Article
© The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of European Association for Computer Assisted Language Learning

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)


Abraham, L. B. (2009) Web-based translation for promoting language awareness: Evidence from Spanish. In Abraham, L. B. & Williams, L. (eds.), Electronic discourse in language learning and language teaching. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 6584. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alrajhi, A. S. (2020) Static infographics effects on the receptive knowledge of idiomatic expressions. Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 10(2): 315326. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Amaral, L. A. & Meurers, D. (2011) On using intelligent computer-assisted language learning in real-life foreign language teaching and learning. ReCALL, 23(1): 424. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beiler, I. R. & Dewilde, J. (2020) Translation as translingual writing practice in English as an additional language. The Modern Language Journal, 104(3): 533549. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bernardini, S. (2016) Discovery learning in the language-for-translation classroom: Corpora as learning aids. Cadernos de Tradução, 36(1): 1435. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Braun, V. & Clarke, V. (2006) Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2): 77101. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, J. D. (2002) Do cloze tests work? Or, is it just an illusion? Second Language Studies, 21(1): 79125. Google Scholar
Cancino, M. & Panes, J. (2021) The impact of Google Translate on L2 writing quality measures: Evidence from Chilean EFL high school learners. System, 98: 102464. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Castelvecchi, D. (2016, September 27) Deep learning boosts Google Translate tool. Nature. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen, M.-H., Huang, S.-T., Chang, J. S. & Liou, H.-C. (2015) Developing a corpus-based paraphrase tool to improve EFL learners’ writing skills. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 28(1): 2240. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chon, Y. V., Shin, D. & Kim, G. E. (2021) Comparing L2 learners’ writing against parallel machine-translated texts: Raters’ assessment, linguistic complexity and errors. System, 96: 102408. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chung, E. S. & Ahn, S. (2021) The effect of using machine translation on linguistic features in L2 writing across proficiency levels and text genres. Computer Assisted Language Learning. Advance online publication. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clifford, J., Merschel, L. & Munné, J. (2013) Surveying the landscape: What is the role of machine translation in language learning? @tic. revista d’innovació educativa, 10: 108–121. Google Scholar
Cohen, A. D. & Brooks-Carson, A. (2001) Research on direct versus translated writing: Students’ strategies and their results. The Modern Language Journal, 85(2): 169188. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cook, G. (2010) Translation in language teaching: An argument for reassessment. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ducar, C. & Schocket, D. H. (2018) Machine translation and the L2 classroom: Pedagogical solutions for making peace with Google translate. Foreign Language Annals, 51(4): 779795. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garcia, I. & Pena, M. I. (2011) Machine translation-assisted language learning: Writing for beginners. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 24(5): 471487. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Groves, M. & Mundt, K. (2015) Friend or foe? Google Translate in language for academic purposes. English for Specific Purposes, 37: 112121. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Godwin-Jones, R. (2015) Contributing, creating, curating: Digital literacies for language learners. Language Learning & Technology, 19(3): 820. Google Scholar
Godwin-Jones, R. (2018) Second language writing online: An update. Language Learning & Technology, 22(1): 115. Google Scholar
Jia, Y., Carl, M. & Wang, X. (2019) How does the post-editing of neural machine translation compare with from-scratch translation? A product and process study. The Journal of Specialised Translation, 31: 6086.Google Scholar
Jiménez-Crespo, M. A. (2017) The role of translation technologies in Spanish language learning. Journal of Spanish Language Teaching, 4(2): 181193. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Le, Q. V. & Schuster, M. (2016, September 27) A neural network for machine translation, at production scale. Google AI Blog. Google Scholar
Lee, S.-M. (2020) The impact of using machine translation on EFL students’ writing. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 33(3): 157175. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leonardi, V. (2010) The role of pedagogical translation in second language acquisition: From theory to practice. Bern: Peter Lang. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Manchón, R. M. (2016) Language and L2 writing: Learning to write and writing to learn in academic contexts. In Hyland, K. & Shaw, P. (eds.), The Routledge handbook of English for academic purposes. Abingdon: Routledge, 139151.Google Scholar
Mundt, K. & Groves, M. (2016) A double-edged sword: The merits and the policy implications of Google Translate in higher education. European Journal of Higher Education, 6(4): 387401. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stapleton, P. & Kin, B. L. K. (2019) Assessing the accuracy and teachers’ impressions of Google Translate: A study of primary L2 writers in Hong Kong. English for Specific Purposes, 56: 1834. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tsai, S.-C. (2017) Effectiveness of ESL students’ performance by computational assessment and role of reading strategies in courseware-implemented business translation tasks. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 30(6): 474487. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tsai, S.-C. (2019) Using Google Translate in EFL drafts: A preliminary investigation. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 32(5–6): 510526. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tsai, S.-C. (2020) Chinese students’ perceptions of using Google Translate as a translingual CALL tool in EFL writing. Computer Assisted Language Learning. Advance online publication. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, K. D. & Heidrich, E. (2013) Our policies, their text: German language students’ strategies with and beliefs about web-based machine translation. Die Unterrichtspraxis/Teaching German, 46(2): 230250. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, J. & González Davies, M. (2017) Tackling the plurilingual student/monolingual classroom phenomenon. TESOL Quarterly, 51(1): 207219. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yoon, H. (2008) More than a linguistic reference: The influence of corpus technology on L2 academic writing. Language Learning & Technology, 12(2): 3148. Google Scholar
Yoon, H.-J. & Polio, C. (2017) The linguistic development of students of English as a second language in two written genres. TESOL Quarterly, 51(2): 275301. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: PDF

Alrajhi supplementary material

Alrajhi supplementary material

Download Alrajhi supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 928 KB

Save article to Kindle

To save this article to your Kindle, first ensure is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the or variations. ‘’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Genre effect on Google Translate–assisted L2 writing output quality
Available formats

Save article to Dropbox

To save this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Genre effect on Google Translate–assisted L2 writing output quality
Available formats

Save article to Google Drive

To save this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Genre effect on Google Translate–assisted L2 writing output quality
Available formats

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *