Does the MS Spell Checker Effectively Correct Non-Native English Writersâ€™ Errors? A Case Study of Saudi University Students

Nasser Alasmari; Nourah Alamri

Does the MS Spell Checker Effectively Correct Non-Native English Writers’ Errors? A Case Study of Saudi University Students

Nasser Alasmari * §

Contact

Nourah Alamri

Contact

§ University of Jeddah

Does the MS Spell Checker Effectively Correct Non-Native English Writers’ Errors? A Case Study of Saudi University Students

Article Fingerprint

ReserarchID

E97PV

Does the MS Spell Checker Effectively Correct Non-Native English Writers’ Errors? A Case Study of Saudi University Students Banner

Key Research Insights

Synthesized scholarly intelligence & interactive research assistant

Abstract

Those learning English as a second or foreign language use spell checkers to correct the mistakes and errors they may have made while typing texts on a computer. However, scholars have debated the effectiveness of such checkers, which were originally designed to fix the spelling mistakes of native speakers. An example of these checkers is the Microsoft (MS) Word program, which constitutes the focus of the current study. This study examined how MS Word treats misspellings made by Saudi learners of English as a foreign language. It specifically addressed three research questions: (1) which L2 spelling errors were successfully fixed by MS Word; (2) which L2 spelling errors were unsuccessfully fixed by MS Word; and (3) how did intermediate L2 learners respond to alternative corrections provided by MS Word. A screentracking software, Screencast-O-Matic, was used to monitor the MS Word spell checker’s treatment of misspelled words. It was also used to track learners’ reactions to alternative corrections provided by MS Word in real time. The study analysed 401 errors made by25 female intermediate-level English learners at a Saudi university.

References

56 Cites in Article

Reference Format

Eid M Alhaisoni,Khalid M. Al-Zuoud,Daya Ram Gaudel (2015). Analysis of Spelling Errors of Beginner Learners of English in the English Foreign Language Context in Saudi Arabia.
Khalid Al-Jardani (2006). ELT and Consciousness-Raising.
Al Jarf,R (2005). The effects of listening comprehension and decoding skills on spelling achievement of EFL freshman students.
Al Jarf,R (2010). Spelling error corpora in EFL.
M Al-Ta'ani (2006). An investigation of spelling errors found in written composition of Second and third secondary students in the United Arab Emirates.
L Antonsen (2012). Improving feedback on L2 misspellings-an FST approach.
K Atkinson (2004). Aspell, Col Gerald Laycock, (10 April 1915–11 July 2006), Vice Lord-Lieutenant of Leicestershire, 1984–90.
E Babbie (2007). The basics of social research.
V Beal (2016). Word processing (word processor application).
Yves Bestgen,Sylviane Granger (2011). Categorising spelling errors to assess L2 writing.
Jack Burston (1998). Antidote 98.
B Chaudhuri,P Samanta,(n.D (2016). A simple realword error detection and correction using local word bigram and trigram.
V Cook (1999). Teaching spelling.
S Corder (1967). The significance of learner's errors.
S Corder (1975). Error Analysis, Interlanguage and Second Language Acquisition.
Elena Cotos (2011). Potential of Automated Writing Evaluation Feedback.
R Cowan,E Choi,H Kim (2003). Four questions for error diagnosis and correction in CALL.
Ab De Haan,Tinus Oppenhuizen (1994). Speller: A reflexive ITS to support the learning of second language spelling.
L Dixon,J Zhao,R Joshi (2010). Influence of L1 Orthography on Spelling English Words by Bilingual Children: A Natural Experiment Comparing Syllabic, Phonological, and Morphosyllabic First Languages.
H Emery (2005). An investigation into the nature and causes of reading and spelling errors made by Arab ESL learners.
Daniel Fallman (2002). The penguin.
Michael Fender (2008). Spelling knowledge and reading development: Insights from Arab ESL learners.
L Figueredo,C Varnhagen (2004). Detecting a problem is half the battle: The Relation between errortype and spelling performance.
Michael Flor,Michael Fried,Alla Rozovskaya (2012). A Benchmark Corpus of English Misspellings and a Minimally-supervised Model for Spelling Correction.
H Godolakis,C (2014). A study of the use of spell and grammar checker in texts by second foreign language learners of Spanish.
Tung-Hsien He,Wen-Lien Wang (2009). Invented spelling of EFL young beginning writers and its relation with phonological awareness and grapheme-phoneme principles.
G Holmes,N De Moras (1997). Figure 2: Aerial view of study site at the University of Victoria, Victoria, British Columbia Canada..
D Hovermale (2010). An analysis of the spelling errors of L2 English learners.
T Heift,A Rimrott (2005). Language learners and generic spellcheckers in CALL.
T Heift,A Rimrott (2008). Evaluating automatic detection of misspellings in German.
Antje Helfrich,Bradley Music (2000). Design and evaluation of grammar checkers in multiple languages.
Zhuanglin Hu (2001). Linguistics: A Course Book.
M Ibrahim (1978). Pattern in spelling errors.
C James,K Klein (1994). Foreign language learners' spelling and proofreading strategies.
C Janssen,(n.D What is Microsoft Word? -Definition from Techopedia.
N Kharma,A Hajjaj (1989). Errors in English among Arabic speakers: Analysis and remedy.
K Kukich (1992). Techniques for automatically correcting words in text.
J Lawley (2016). Spelling: Computerised feedback for self-correction.
Roger Mitton (1987). Spelling checkers, spelling correctors and the misspellings of poor spellers.
R Mitton,T Okada (2007). The adaptation of an English spellchecker for Japanese writers.
Sima Sokolov (2012). The Stuttering Characteristics of Spanish-English Bilingual Adult Speakers.
M Ndiaye,A Vandeventer Faltin (2003). A spell checker tailored to language learners.
Takeshi Okada (2005). A Corpus-based Study of Spelling Errors of Japanese EFL Writers with Reference to Errors Occurring in Word-initial and Word-final Positions.
(2014). One-Click Screen Capture Recording on Windows or Mac Computers with No Install for FREE.
Jennifer Pedler (2001). Computer spellcheckers and dyslexics—a performance survey.
Joseph Pollock,Antonio Zamora (1984). Automatic spelling correction in scientific and scholarly text.
J Richards (1974). A non-contrastive approach to error analysis.
A Rimrott (2005). Spell checking in computerassisted language learning: A study of misspellings by nonnative writers of German (master's thesis.
M Sahrir (2015). Design of an Arabic spell checker font for enhancing writing skills: self-learning prototype among non-Arabic speakers.
Kate Farlow (2016). Selections from Silent Life and Silent Language, or, the Inner Life of a Mute, 1883.
J Smart,F Altorfer (2003). Teach yourself Arabic.
W Snyder (1995). Cognitive strategies in second language lexical processing. Evidence from English speakers' spelling errors in Spanish.
Tajweed (2016). Tajweed game for children with autism: An interactive game for autism children to learn tajweed.
G Thome (1987). Rechtschreibfehler turkischer und deutscher Schuler [Misspellings by Turkish and German students.
Eric Weisstein (null). HTML Colors.
Otto Kruse,Christian Rapp (2013). Word Processing Software: The Rise of MS Word.

Download References

Funding

No external funding was declared for this work.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

No ethics committee approval was required for this article type.

Data Availability

Not applicable for this article.

How to Cite This Article

Nasser Alasmari, Nourah Alamri. 2019. "Does the MS Spell Checker Effectively Correct Non-Native English Writers’ Errors? A Case Study of Saudi University Students". Global Journal of Human-Social Science - G: Linguistics & Education GJHSS-G Volume 19 (GJHSS Volume 19 Issue G10).

More Citation Formats

Select Citation Style:

Download Citation

GJHSS Volume 19 Issue G10

Explore Journals Explore Volume Read This Issue

Journal Specifications

Crossref Journal DOI 10.17406/GJHSS

Print ISSN 0975-587X

e-ISSN 2249-460X

Keywords

Not Found

Classification

GJHSS-G Classification FOR Code: 139999

Submission ReceivedDecember 7, 2018
Peer Review Double Blind
Handling Editor
Accepted January 1, 2019
Published January 15, 2019

Version of record

v1.2

Issue date

December 26, 2019

Language

English

Experiance in AR

Explore published articles in an immersive Augmented Reality environment. Our platform converts research papers into interactive 3D books, allowing readers to view and interact with content using AR and VR compatible devices.

View in VR

Read in 3D

Your published article is automatically converted into a realistic 3D book. Flip through pages and read research papers in a more engaging and interactive format.

View in 3D

Article Matrices

Total Score: 122

Country: Saudi Arabia

Subject: Global Journal of Human-Social Science

Authors: Nasser Alasmari, Nourah Alamri (PhD/Dr. count: 0)

View Count (all-time): 356

Total Views (Real + Logic): 1210

Total Downloads (simulated): 77

Publish Date: 2019 01, Tue

Monthly Totals (Real + Logic):

Month 1: 55 views
Month 2: 33 views
Month 3: 33 views
Month 4: 66 views
Month 5: 61 views
Month 6: 34 views
Month 7: 39 views
Month 8: 43 views
Month 9: 34 views
Month 10: 41 views
Month 11: 39 views
Month 12: 38 views
Month 13: 20 views
Month 14: 14 views
Month 15: 33 views
Month 16: 46 views
Month 17: 39 views
Month 18: 33 views
Month 19: 27 views
Month 20: 34 views
Month 21: 24 views
Month 22: 40 views
Month 23: 27 views
Month 24: 38 views
Month 25: 47 views
Month 26: 48 views
Month 27: 33 views
Month 28: 27 views
Month 29: 16 views
Month 30: 36 views
Month 31: 26 views
Month 32: 29 views
Month 33: 29 views
Month 34: 35 views
Month 35: 23 views
Month 36: 24 views
Month 37: 34 views
Month 38: 21 views
Month 39: 35 views
Month 40: 37 views
Month 41: 42 views
Month 42: 23 views
Month 43: 16 views
Month 44: 35 views
Month 45: 27 views
Month 46: 40 views
Month 47: 34 views
Month 48: 30 views
Month 49: 34 views
Month 50: 34 views
Month 51: 20 views
Month 52: 41 views
Month 53: 19 views
Month 54: 50 views
Month 55: 36 views
Month 56: 46 views
Month 57: 18 views
Month 58: 19 views
Month 59: 18 views
Month 60: 27 views
Month 61: 22 views
Month 62: 35 views
Month 63: 22 views
Month 64: 36 views
Month 65: 21 views
Month 66: 37 views
Month 67: 26 views
Month 68: 14 views
Month 69: 31 views
Month 70: 46 views
Month 71: 36 views
Month 72: 20 views
Month 73: 41 views
Month 74: 51 views
Month 75: 47 views
Month 76: 39 views
Month 77: 39 views
Month 78: 40 views
Month 79: 29 views
Month 80: 36 views
Month 81: 26 views
Month 82: 41 views
Month 83: 18 views
Month 84: 35 views
Month 85: 24 views
Month 86: 35 views
Month 87: 15 views
Month 88: 26 views
Month 89: 27 views
Month 90: 56 views
Month 91: 58 views
Month 92: 50 views
Month 93: 57 views

Total Views: 1.2K

Total Downloads: 77

All Trends