| 21 |
ポストエディットと持続可能な翻訳の未来 ; Post-editing and a Sustainable Future for Translators
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 23 |
Digitizing the Old English Anonymous and Wulfstanian Homilies through the Electronic Corpus of Anonymous Homilies in Old English ( ECHOE ) Project
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 24 |
Human evaluation of three machine translation systems : from quality to attitudes by professional translators
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 25 |
Elucidário de africanismos: resultados de um garimpo no arquivo pessoal de Nelson Coelho de Senna ; Elucinário de africanismos: results of a panning in the personal archive of Nelson Coelho de Senna
|
|
Almeida, Olivia Nogueira de. - : Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações da USP, 2021. : Universidade de São Paulo, 2021. : Faculdade de Filosofia, Letras e Ciências Humanas, 2021
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 26 |
Interdisciplinary Uses of Digital Editions for Italian High School Students. Shakespeare’s ‘Cymbeline’ and the Silvano Toti Globe Theatre
|
|
|
|
In: Lingue e Linguaggi; Volume 45 (2021) Special Issue; 95-110 (2021)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 27 |
Exploring ideological messages in newspaper editorials and news reports on the first human gene-editing case
|
|
|
|
In: Lingue e Linguaggi; Volume 42 (2021) Special Issue; 101-122 (2021)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 28 |
Post-editing Machine Translation in MateCat: a classroom experiment
|
|
Herget, Katrin. - : Editorial Universitat Politècnica de València, 2021
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 29 |
Measuring Student Success in JOUR200A: Fundamentals of Editing & Reporting I: A Beginning Writing, Editing and Reporting Class
|
|
|
|
In: UNL Faculty Course Portfolios (2021)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 30 |
JOUR200A: Fundamentals of Editing and Reporting I — Teaching Lede Writing for Digital/Print, Broadcast and Social Media Simultaneously
|
|
|
|
In: UNL Faculty Course Portfolios (2021)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 31 |
Determining efficient post-writing activity for error correction: Self-editing, peer review, or teacher feedback?
|
|
|
|
In: Porta Linguarum: revista internacional de didáctica de las lenguas extranjeras, ISSN 1697-7467, Nº. 36, 2021, pags. 101-117 (2021)
|
|
Abstract:
Writing in English has always been a formidable obstacle for learners; accordingly, many studies aimed to find not band-aid but complete solutions for learners to improve their writing proficiency. One of these solutions, largely thought to reduce language errors, is error correction. However, instructors seem to be alternating between different corrective feedbacks with the purpose of determining the most efficient one for their students. Previous research largely compared peer feedback and teacher correction and ignored self-editing. In this sense, this study investigated three error correction methods, namely self-editing, peer review, and teacher corrections. To achieve this, three student groups were created and each group, composed of 10 students, was tested with one method. Wilcoxon, Kruskal-Wallis, and Mann-Whitney U tests were employed for analyses and the results yielded significant differences in terms of all methods concerning comparisons of pre- and post-tests. On the other hand, the test to determine inter-group differences found significant results for the method of teacher correction. Furthermore, the most frequent linguistic errors in students’ writing were revealed. This research contributes to teaching pedagogy by comforting instructors regarding the efficiency of teacher correction and suggests instructors focus on particularly spelling, punctuation, and article to prompt writing development. ; Escribir en inglés siempre ha sido un obstáculo formidable para los estudiantes; en consecuencia, muchos estudios tenían como objetivo encontrar no una curita, sino soluciones completas para que los alumnos mejoraran su competencia en la escritura. Una de estas soluciones, pensada en gran medida para reducir los errores de idioma, es la corrección de errores. Sin embargo, los instructores parecen estar alternando entre diferentes retroalimentaciones correctivas con el propósito de determinar cuál es la más eficiente para sus estudiantes. Las investigaciones anteriores compararon en gran medida la retroalimentación de los compañeros y la corrección del maestro e ignoraron la autoedición. En este sentido, este estudio investigó tres métodos de corrección de errores, a saber, la autoedición, la revisión por pares y las correcciones del maestro. Para lograr esto, se crearon tres grupos de estudiantes y cada grupo, compuesto por 10 estudiantes, fue probado con un método. Para los análisis se utilizaron las pruebas U de Wilcoxon, Kruskal-Wallis y Mann-Whitney, y los resultados arrojaron diferencias significativas en términos de todos los métodos con respecto a las comparaciones de las pruebas previas y posteriores. Por otro lado, la prueba para determinar diferencias entre grupos encontró resultados significativos para el método de corrección del maestro. Además, se revelaron los errores lingüísticos más frecuentes en la escritura de los estudiantes. Esta investigación contribuye a la enseñanza de la pedagogía al consolar a los instructores con respecto a la eficiencia de la corrección del maestro y sugiere que los instructores se centren en particular en la ortografía, la puntuación y el artículo para estimular el desarrollo de la escritura.
|
|
Keyword:
autoedición; corrección de errores; corrección del maestro; error correction; Peer-review; revisión por pares; self-editing; teacher correction
|
|
URL: https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/oaiart?codigo=8020377
|
|
BASE
|
|
Hide details
|
|
|
| 32 |
The effect of editing techniques on machine translation-informed academic foreing language writing
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 33 |
A reception study of machine translated subtitles for MOOCs
|
|
Hu, Ke. - : Dublin City University. School of Applied Language and Intercultural Studies, 2020. : Dublin City University. Centre for Translation and Textual Studies (CTTS), 2020. : Dublin City University. ADAPT, 2020
|
|
In: Hu, Ke (2020) A reception study of machine translated subtitles for MOOCs. PhD thesis, Dublin City University. (2020)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 34 |
A human evaluation of English-Irish statistical and neural machine translation
|
|
|
|
In: Dowling, Meghan orcid:0000-0003-1637-4923 , Castilho, Sheila orcid:0000-0002-8416-6555 , Moorkens, Joss orcid:0000-0003-4864-5986 , Lynn, Teresa and Way, Andy orcid:0000-0001-5736-5930 (2020) A human evaluation of English-Irish statistical and neural machine translation. In: Proceedings of the 22nd Annual Conference of the European Association for Machine Translation, 6 Nov 2020, Lisbon, Portugal. (2020)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 35 |
No more rage against the machine: how the corpus-based identification of machine-translationese can lead to student empowerment
|
|
|
|
In: ISSN: 1740-357X ; The Journal of specialised translation (JoSTrans) ; https://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-02913980 ; The Journal of specialised translation (JoSTrans), 2020, 34, pp.150-170 ; https://www.jostrans.org/issue34/art_loock.php (2020)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 36 |
Representation of gene-editing in British and Italian newspapers. A cross-linguistic corpus-assisted discourse study ...
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 37 |
Online Headline Testing at a Belgian Broadsheet: A Postfoundational Perspective on How News Professionals 'Sell' Content ...
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 38 |
Online Headline Testing at a Belgian Broadsheet: A Postfoundational Perspective on How News Professionals 'Sell' Content ...
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 39 |
ERRATAS database of editorial principles and practices in printed editions of historical correspondence ...
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 40 |
ERRATAS database of editorial principles and practices in printed editions of historical correspondence ...
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
|
|
