數位科技的快速進步以及在教育環境中線上資源的便利存取，促使Google翻譯在語言課堂中的廣泛使用。越來越多的學習者利用Google翻譯作為英語為外語（EFL）學習的輔助方式，受益於其線上可用性和即時性。近來的研究顯示，在適當的引導下，Google翻譯可以作為外語寫作的正面學習輔助工具。然而, 將 Google翻譯納入台灣 10 年級學生的英語寫作以提高他們寫作成果的關注有限。因此，本研究旨在檢驗Google翻譯對台灣十年級學生英語寫作的影響以及他們對Google翻譯在寫作中使用的看法。實驗採用單組前後干預研究設計，共有34名來自一個完整班級的十年級學生參與實驗。為了比較和對照學生在使用Google翻譯前後的寫作結果，他們首先被給予 40 分鐘的時間在沒有 GT 或任何幫助的情況下用英語完成紙筆寫信任務。兩週後，他們接受了五十分鐘的GT使用培訓課程。兩天後，他們有 40 分鐘的時間根據同一主題僅使用 GT 從頭重寫作文。參與者透過問卷調查表達對Google翻譯使用於英語寫作的看法。
主要研究結果顯示，在台灣十年級學生的Google翻譯輔助寫作和非Google翻譯輔助寫作之間，寫作流暢度和整體寫作分數沒有顯著差異。然而，當使用Google翻譯時，與他們的非 Google翻譯輔助寫作相比，他們的寫作表現出更高的準確性，且具有較高的詞彙密度，並包含更多高階和低頻詞彙。學生對英語寫作時使用Google翻譯表明看法，認為Google翻譯對於詞彙的改進最有幫助，但他們認為它對英語寫作中文法的影響微乎其微。這些發現有助於了解Google翻譯在英語為外語寫作中的有效性，並為教師提供教學啟示。藉由納入Google翻譯來輔助詞彙學習，並透過延長培訓課程來優化入Google翻譯的使用，教師可以提升學生的寫作成果。此外，培養學生對Google翻譯局限性的理解、促進獨立寫作技能和後設語言認知的發展對於最大限度地發揮 Google翻譯在英語為外語寫作中的效益至關重要。總之，本研究突顯了Google翻譯作為台灣十年級學生英語寫作的正向學習輔助工具的潛力。

The rapid progress of digital technology and easy access to online resources in educational settings have led to the widespread use of Google Translate (GT) in language classrooms. An increasing number of learners have been utilizing GT as a means of support for EFL learning, benefiting from its online availability and immediacy. Recent studies have revealed that under appropriate guidance, GT can serve as a positive learning aid for L2 writing. However, limited attention has been paid to incorporating GT into Taiwanese grade 10th students’ L2 writing to improve their writing outcomes. Hence, this study aims to examine the effects of GT on the English writing of Taiwanese grade 10th students and their perceptions of GT use in their writing. The experiment was a one-group pre-post intervention study design. Thirty-four tenth graders from an intact class participated in the experiment. To compare and contrast students’ writing outcomes before and after using GT, they were first given forty minutes to finish a paper-pencil letter-writing task in English without GT or any help. After two weeks, they received a fifty-minute training session on GT use. Two days later, they were given forty minutes to rewrite the composition from scratch based on the same topic by using GT only. The participants’ perceptions of GT use were examined through a questionnaire.
The major findings revealed that no significant difference was found in writing fluency and overall writing scores between Taiwanese 10th graders' GT-aided and non-GT-aided writing. However, when using GT, their writing demonstrates significantly higher accuracy, exhibits a higher lexical density, and includes a greater number of advanced and low-frequency words, compared to their non-GT-aided writing. The students’ perceptions of GT use in EFL writing indicate that GT is most helpful for vocabulary improvement, but its impact on grammar in their English writing is perceived to be minimal. These findings contribute to the understanding of GT's effectiveness in L2 writing and provide pedagogical implications for teachers. By incorporating GT to support vocabulary acquisition and optimizing GT use through extended training sessions, teachers can enhance students' writing outcomes. Additionally, fostering students' understanding of GT's limitations and promoting the development of independent writing skills and metalinguistic awareness are crucial for maximizing the benefits of GT in EFL writing. In conclusion, this study highlights the potential of GT as a positive learning aid for L2 writing among Taiwanese grade 10th students.

Alhaisoni, E., & Alhaysony, M. (2017). An Investigation of Saudi EFL University Students’ Attitudes towards the Use of Google Translate. International Journal of English Language Education, 5(1). https://doi.org/10.5296/ijele.v5i1.10696
Alrajhi, A. S. (2022). Genre effect on Google Translate–assisted L2 writing output quality. ReCALL, 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0958344022000143
Bahri, H., & Mahadi, T. S. T. . (2016). Google Translate as a Supplementary Tool for Learning Malay: A Case Study at Universiti Sains Malaysia. Advances in Language and Literary Studies, 7(3), 161-167. https://doi.org/10.7575/aiac.alls.v.7n.3p.161
Barrot, J. S. (2020). Integrating Technology into ESL/EFL Writing through Grammarly. RELC Journal. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688220966632
Belam, J. (2003). Buying up to falling down: A deductive approach to teaching post-editing. Proceedings of workshop on teaching translation technologies and tools, Ninth Machine Translation Summit, 1-10.
Briggs, N. (2018). Neural machine translation tools in the language learning classroom: Students’ use, perceptions, and analyses. JALT CALL Journal, 14(1), 2-24.
Cancino, M., & Panes, J. (2021). The impact of Google Translate on L2 writing quality measures: Evidence from Chilean EFL high school learners. System, 98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2021.102464
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.
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, 1-26. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2020.1871029
Correa, M. (2014). Leaving the “peer” out of peer-editing: Online translators as a pedagogical tool in the Spanish as a second language classroom. Latin American Journal of Content and Language Integrated Learning, 7(1), 1-20. https://doi.org/10.5294/laclil.2014.7.1.1
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), 779-795. https://doi.org/10.1111/flan.12366
Farzi, R. (2016). Taming translation technology for L2 writing: Documenting the use of free online translation tools by ESL Students in a writing course. [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of Ottawa.
Fredholm, K. (2015). Online Translation Use in Spanish as a Foreign Language Essay Writing- Effects on Fluency, Complexity and Accuracy.
Garcia, I., & Pena, M. I. (2011). Machine translation-assisted language learning: writing for beginners. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 24(5), 471-487. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2011.582687
Ghufron, M. A., & Rosyida, F. (2018). The Role of Grammarly in Assessing English as a Foreign Language (EFL) Writing. Lingua Cultura, 12(4). https://doi.org/10.21512/lc.v12i4.4582
Groves, M., & Mundt, K. (2015). Friend or foe? Google Translate in language for academic purposes. English for Specific Purposes, 37, 112-121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2014.09.001
Hartle, D. (2008, Nov). Alex & Me: How a scientist and a parrot discovered a hidden world of animal intelligence—and formed a deep bond in the process [Book Review] [Alex & Me: How a Scientist and a Parrot Discovered a Hidden World of Animal Intelligence—and Formed a Deep Bond in the Process, by Irene M. Pepperberg]. Library Journal, 133(18), 94.
Jolley, J. R., & Maimone, L. (2022). Thirty Years of Machine Translation in Language Teaching and Learning: A Review of the Literature. L2 Journal, 14(1). https://doi.org/10.5070/l214151760
Kliffer, M. D. (2008). Post-editing machine translation as an FSL exercise. Porta Linguarum Revista Interuniversitaria de Didáctica de las Lenguas Extranjeras. https://doi.org/10.30827/Digibug.31745
Koehn, P. (2009). Statistical machine translation. Cambridge University Press.
Lee, S.-M. (2020). The impact of using machine translation on EFL students’ writing. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 33(3), 157-175. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2018.1553186
Lee, S.-M. (2021). The effectiveness of machine translation in foreign language education a systematic review and meta-analysis. Computer Assisted Language Learning. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2021.1901745
Lee, S.-M. (2022). An investigation of machine translation output quality and the influencing factors of source texts. ReCALL, 34(1), 81-94. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0958344021000124
Lee, S.-M., & Briggs, N. (2021). Effects of using machine translation to mediate the revision process of Korean university students’ academic writing. ReCALL, 33(1), 18-33. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0958344020000191
Luton, L. (2003). If the computer did my homework, how come I didn’t get an “A”?, 76(4), 766-770. The French Review, 76(4), 766-770.
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), 387-401. https://doi.org/10.1080/21568235.2016.1172248
Niño, A. (2004). Recycling MT: A Course on Foreign Language Writing via MT post-editing. CLUK (Computational Linguistics United Kingdom 7th Annual Research Colloquium), 6th and 7th January 2004 in the University of Birmingham, United Kingdom.
Niño, A. (2008). Evaluating the use of machine translation post-editing in the foreign language class. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 21(1), 29-49. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588220701865482
Niño, A. (2009). Machine translation in foreign language learning: language learners’ and tutors’ perceptions of its advantages and disadvantages. ReCALL, 21(2), 241-258. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0958344009000172
Niño, A. (2020). Exploring the use of online machine translation for independent language learning. Research in Learning Technology, 28(0). https://doi.org/10.25304/rlt.v28.2402
O’Neill, E. (2014). Real-life technology and the L2 French classroom: Online translation usage among intermediate French students. Selected Proceedings of the AATF Convention, 36-42.
O’Neill, E. (2016). Measuring the impact of online translation on FL writing scores. IALL Journal of Language Learning Technologies.
O’Neill, E. (2019). Training students to use online translators and dictionaries: The impact on second language writing scores. International Journal of Research Studies in Language Learning, 8(2). https://doi.org/10.5861/ijrsll.2019.4002
Shei, C.-C. (2002b). Teaching MT through pre-editing: Three case studies. Proceedings of the 6th EAMT Workshop on Teaching Machine Translation, Manchester, 89-98.
Šišková, Z. (2012). Lexical richness in EFL students’ narratives. Language Studies Working Papers, 4, 26-36.
Somers, H. (2001). Three perspectives on MT in the classroom. MT Summit VIII Workshop on Teaching Machine Translation Review, Santiago de Compostela, Spain, 25-29.
Somers, H. (2003). Machine translation in the classroom. BENJAMINS TRANSLATION LIBRARY, 35, 319-340.
Somers, H. (2004). Does machine translation have a role in language learning. UNTELE 2004: L’Autonomie de l’Enseignant et de l’Apprenant face aux Technologies de l’Information et de la Communication–Teacher and Learner Autonomy vis-a-vis Information Communication Technology.
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, 18-34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2019.07.001
Tsai, S.-C. (2019). Using google translate in EFL drafts: a preliminary investigation. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 32(5-6), 510-526. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2018.1527361
Tsai, S.-C. (2020). Chinese students’ perceptions of using Google Translate as a translingual CALL tool in EFL writing. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 1-23. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2020.1799412
Wu, Y., Schuster, M., Chen, Z., Le, Q. V., Norouzi, M., Macherey, W., ... & Dean, J. (2016). Google's neural machine translation system: Bridging the gap between human and machine translation. https://arxiv.org/abs/1609.08144