Usability of ChatGPT in Second Language Acquisition: Capabilities, Effectiveness, Applications, Challenges, and Solutions
Open accessAbstract
In the realm of language acquisition, the integration of Artificial Intelligence (AI) presents a promising frontier. However, gaps exist in understanding the practical application of AI-driven tools, particularly in second language learning contexts. This study delves into the usability of ChatGPT, an advanced AI language model, within the domain of second language acquisition. This paper synthesizes existing literature on ChatGPT’s multifaceted capabilities, its effectiveness, its associated challenges, and the potential solutions to these challenges in language learning environments. This review demonstrates ChatGPT’s substantial potential in enhancing language learning outcomes, including fostering learner autonomy, improving motivation, and developing language proficiency. Yet, nuanced challenges such as preserving academic integrity and difficulties in crafting effective prompts emerge as crucial considerations. To address these issues, possible solutions including enhancing AI literacy among learners and educators are discussed. This paper sheds light on the complex dynamics of AI-assisted language education, urging ongoing research and refinement to fully utilize these technologies in enhancing second language learning.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
In second language contexts, ChatGPT is frequently described as a source of accessible input, vocabulary expansion, and grammatical support, particularly for learners with limited confidence or exposure to proficient language models.
“In second language contexts, ChatGPT is frequently described as a source of accessible input, vocabulary expansion, and grammatical support, particularly for learners with limited confidence or exposure to proficient language models [35].”
From Fluency Illusion: A Review on Influence of ChatGPT in Classroom Settings (2026) · cites this paper as [35]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 34 · Cited by 12
- Authors
- Li, Y.
- Affiliations
- Columbia University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Li, Yiwen
- ORCID
- Li, Yiwen
- Venue
- Studies in Applied Linguistics and TESOL
- Publisher
- Columbia University Libraries
- Published
- 2024-07-16
- Volume
- 24
- Issue
- 1
- ISSN
- 2689-193X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4400685553
- Cited by
- 12
- References
- 34
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 1
- FWCI
- 4.53
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- diamond
- doi.org
- Locations
- Studies in Applied Linguistics and TESOL (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Columbia Academic Commons (Columbia University)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Artificial Intelligence in Education
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › English Language Learning and Teaching
- Keywords
- ChatGPT, second language acquisition, AI-assisted language learning, usability, learner autonomy, student motivation, language proficiency, academic integrity, prompt engineering, AI literacy, large language models
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