Cited by 72Second Language Acquisition and LearningNatural Language Processing TechniquesEnglish Language Learning and Teaching

Developing a corpus-based paraphrase tool to improve EFL learners' writing skills

Chen, M.-H., Huang, S.-T., Chang, J.S., Liou, H.-C.·2015·Computer Assisted Language Learning

Abstract

Paraphrasing, or restating information using different words, is critical to successful writing. However, EFL learners have difficulty in making paraphrases to meet their writing demands, and there has been little research on developing automatic reference tools to assist these learners' paraphrasing skills for better writing quality. In this study, we developed PREFER, an online corpus-based paraphrasing assistance system. Allowing multi-word input and returning promptly with a list of paraphrases in English and Chinese, along with usage patterns and example sentences, PREFER provides substantial support for EFL learners to vary their expressions during writing. An assessment study of the effectiveness of PREFER was conducted with 55 Chinese-speaking EFL college freshmen in an Asian country. The results indicated that PREFER offered the most benefits to students' writing performance (with an after-use improvement of 38.2%), compared with an online dictionary and an online thesaurus (−31.6% and −6.2%, respectively). Further investigation revealed that the less proficient, more motivated, and more conservative students showed more significant progress in the paraphrasing task with the help of PREFER. In the meantime, nearly 90% of the students expressed satisfaction with the paraphrases generated by PREFER, and its functions, and another 75% of them acknowledged that PREFER benefits their writing task.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/09588221.2013.783873

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 33

  1. 10.1016/j.jslw.2006.05.001 · DOI
  2. 10.2307/3586721 · DOI
  3. 10.1017/CBO9781139524551.018 · DOI
  4. 10.1080/09588220500185769 · DOI
  5. 10.1207/s15327701jlie0303_1 · DOI
  6. 10.1080/09588220802090337 · DOI
  7. 10.1016/S1060-3743(98)90003-0 · DOI
  8. 10.1016/1060-3743(93)90014-T · DOI
  9. Donaldson R.P., 1999, CALICO Journal, 16, 531, 10.1558/cj.v16i4.531-557 · DOI
  10. 10.1111/j.1365-2729.2006.00165.x · DOI
  11. 10.1080/09588220802343496 · DOI
  12. Harbusch K., 2011, WorldCALL: International perspectives on computer-assisted language learning, 128
  13. Holland M., 1993, CALICO Journal, 11, 28, 10.1558/cj.v11i1.28-46 · DOI
  14. Johns T., 1991, Classroom concordancing, 27
  15. 10.1093/applin/11.3.253 · DOI
  16. 10.1016/j.jslw.2006.09.006 · DOI
  17. 10.1037/h0042120 · DOI
  18. Lightbown P., 1993, How languages are learned
  19. Liou H.C.U, 2006, CALICO Journal, 24, 77, 10.1558/cj.v24i1.77-95 · DOI
  20. 10.3917/ls.104.0147 · DOI
  21. Martinot C., 2009, Cahiers de praxématique, 52, 29, 10.4000/praxematique.1350 · DOI
  22. 10.3758/BRM.41.3.682 · DOI
  23. McInnis L., 2009, Analyzing English L1 and L2 paraphrasing strategies through concurrent verbal report and stimulated recall protocols
  24. Mel'čuk I., 1992, Dictionnaire explicatif et combinatoire du françaiscontemporain
  25. Milićević J., 2008, Proceedings of the Symposium ‘Complexity, Accuracy and Fluency in Second Language Use, Learning and Teaching’, 153
  26. 10.1162/089120103321337421 · DOI
  27. 10.1016/j.jslw.2003.08.004 · DOI
  28. 10.7202/009367ar · DOI
  29. 10.2190/3NEY-BNT0-FB28-VBWY · DOI
  30. 10.1177/0741088303262846 · DOI
  31. 10.1007/s12564-009-9035-y · DOI
  32. 10.1080/09588220701331451 · DOI
  33. Žolkovskij A., 1967, Problemy kibernetiki, 19, 177

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Chen, M.-H., Huang, S.-T., Chang, J. S., & Liou, H.-C.
Affiliations
National Tsing Hua University (TW)
Corresponding author
Chen, M.-H.
Venue
Computer Assisted Language Learning
Published
2013-04-11
Volume
28
Issue
1
Pages
22-40
ISSN
  • 0958-8221 (ISSN-L)
  • 1744-3210
OpenAlex
W2091550499
Cited by
72
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 5 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 1
FWCI
3.43
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Computer Assisted Language Learning (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Science Council
  • Academia Sinica
  • National Tsing Hua University
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Second Language Acquisition and Learning
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Natural Language Processing Techniques
  • Social Sciences › Education › English Language Learning and Teaching
Keywords
paraphrase, EFL writing, writing skills, student motivation, learner proficiency, student satisfaction

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review