Textual reviewing in ChatGPT times
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2023 |
Outros Autores: | |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | por |
Título da fonte: | Cadernos CESPUC de Pesquisa |
Texto Completo: | http://periodicos.pucminas.br/index.php/cadernoscespuc/article/view/32041 |
Resumo: | This article aims to present the results of the research that evaluated ChatGPT's ability to revise texts, not only to identify and correct grammatical errors, but to perceive broader aspects relating to discursive sphere to which the texts in focus were integrated. It was used an exploratory, bibliographic, and qualitative research as conceived by Gil (2017). We proposed to the algorithm three authentic texts containing deviations of different natures, grammatical and discursive, to be reviewed, corrected, enhanced, and evaluated, separately. Thus, based on an interactionist and socio-discursive approach (Volochinov, 2017; Sobral and Barbosa, 2019; Rodrigues, 2015; Salgado, 2013), we assessed ChatGPT's capacity to work with texts. The results indicated that it demonstrated notable abilities in intervening and improving texts, in the sphere of gramatical surface, but he also made mistakes. This shows us that textual review does not dispense with human oversight, especially when dealing with more complex discursive issues of a discursive nature. It is concluded that ChatGPT can be a useful tool to improve textual review, but its performance is not capable of considering the author’s style and intention, as well as the nature of the speech in question. |
id |
PUC_MINS-7_b01bd6b782b6f2a0325e6e678ae173f6 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:ojs.pkp.sfu.ca:article/32041 |
network_acronym_str |
PUC_MINS-7 |
network_name_str |
Cadernos CESPUC de Pesquisa |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Textual reviewing in ChatGPT timesA revisão textual em tempos de ChatGPTtextual reviewingchatgptartificial intelligencerevisão textualchatgptinteligência artificialThis article aims to present the results of the research that evaluated ChatGPT's ability to revise texts, not only to identify and correct grammatical errors, but to perceive broader aspects relating to discursive sphere to which the texts in focus were integrated. It was used an exploratory, bibliographic, and qualitative research as conceived by Gil (2017). We proposed to the algorithm three authentic texts containing deviations of different natures, grammatical and discursive, to be reviewed, corrected, enhanced, and evaluated, separately. Thus, based on an interactionist and socio-discursive approach (Volochinov, 2017; Sobral and Barbosa, 2019; Rodrigues, 2015; Salgado, 2013), we assessed ChatGPT's capacity to work with texts. The results indicated that it demonstrated notable abilities in intervening and improving texts, in the sphere of gramatical surface, but he also made mistakes. This shows us that textual review does not dispense with human oversight, especially when dealing with more complex discursive issues of a discursive nature. It is concluded that ChatGPT can be a useful tool to improve textual review, but its performance is not capable of considering the author’s style and intention, as well as the nature of the speech in question.Este artigo tem como objetivo expor os resultados de pesquisa que avaliou a capacidade do ChatGPT em revisar textos, não apenas em identificar e corrigir erros gramaticais, mas de perceber aspectos mais amplos referentes à esfera discursiva a que se integravam os exemplares em foco. Foi utilizada uma pesquisa exploratória, bibliográfica e qualitativa, segundo concebe Gil (2017). Propusemos ao algoritmo três textos autênticos com desvios de naturezas diversas, gramaticais e discursivas, para que fossem: revisados, corrigidos, aprimorados e avaliados, separadamente. E assim, com base em uma abordagem interacionista e sociodiscursiva (Volóchinov, 2017; Sobral e Barbosa, 2019; Rodrigues, 2015; Salgado, 2013), avaliamos a capacidade do ChatGPT em trabalhar com esses textos. Os resultados indicaram que ele apresentou habilidades notáveis na intervenção e aprimoramento de textos, na esfera da superfície gramatical, porém também incorre em erros. Isso evidencia que a revisão textual não dispensa o olhar humano, especialmente ao lidar com questões mais complexas, de natureza discursiva. Conclui-se que o ChatGPT pode ser uma ferramenta útil para aprimorar a revisão textual, mas sua atuação não é capaz de considerar o estilo e a intenção do autor, bem como a natureza do discurso em questão.Editora PUC Minas2023-12-29info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttp://periodicos.pucminas.br/index.php/cadernoscespuc/article/view/3204110.5752/P.2358-3231.2023n44p163-189Cadernos CESPUC de Pesquisa Série Ensaios; n. 44 (2023): Estudos linguísticos e os seus diferentes quadros teóricos ; 163-1892358-3231reponame:Cadernos CESPUC de Pesquisainstname:Pontifícia Universidade Católica de Minas Gerais (PUC Minas)instacron:PUC_MINSporhttp://periodicos.pucminas.br/index.php/cadernoscespuc/article/view/32041/21963Copyright (c) 2023 Editora PUC Minashttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessBarros, Ev'Ângela Batista Rodrigues de Pereira, Sara Izabela Alves 2024-08-20T14:33:34Zoai:ojs.pkp.sfu.ca:article/32041Revistahttp://periodicos.pucminas.br/index.php/cadernoscespuc/PUBhttp://periodicos.pucminas.br/index.php/cadernoscespuc/oaicespuc@pucminas.br||cespuc@pucminas.br2358-32311516-4020opendoar:2024-08-20T14:33:34Cadernos CESPUC de Pesquisa - Pontifícia Universidade Católica de Minas Gerais (PUC Minas)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Textual reviewing in ChatGPT times A revisão textual em tempos de ChatGPT |
title |
Textual reviewing in ChatGPT times |
spellingShingle |
Textual reviewing in ChatGPT times Barros, Ev'Ângela Batista Rodrigues de textual reviewing chatgpt artificial intelligence revisão textual chatgpt inteligência artificial |
title_short |
Textual reviewing in ChatGPT times |
title_full |
Textual reviewing in ChatGPT times |
title_fullStr |
Textual reviewing in ChatGPT times |
title_full_unstemmed |
Textual reviewing in ChatGPT times |
title_sort |
Textual reviewing in ChatGPT times |
author |
Barros, Ev'Ângela Batista Rodrigues de |
author_facet |
Barros, Ev'Ângela Batista Rodrigues de Pereira, Sara Izabela Alves |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Pereira, Sara Izabela Alves |
author2_role |
author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Barros, Ev'Ângela Batista Rodrigues de Pereira, Sara Izabela Alves |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
textual reviewing chatgpt artificial intelligence revisão textual chatgpt inteligência artificial |
topic |
textual reviewing chatgpt artificial intelligence revisão textual chatgpt inteligência artificial |
description |
This article aims to present the results of the research that evaluated ChatGPT's ability to revise texts, not only to identify and correct grammatical errors, but to perceive broader aspects relating to discursive sphere to which the texts in focus were integrated. It was used an exploratory, bibliographic, and qualitative research as conceived by Gil (2017). We proposed to the algorithm three authentic texts containing deviations of different natures, grammatical and discursive, to be reviewed, corrected, enhanced, and evaluated, separately. Thus, based on an interactionist and socio-discursive approach (Volochinov, 2017; Sobral and Barbosa, 2019; Rodrigues, 2015; Salgado, 2013), we assessed ChatGPT's capacity to work with texts. The results indicated that it demonstrated notable abilities in intervening and improving texts, in the sphere of gramatical surface, but he also made mistakes. This shows us that textual review does not dispense with human oversight, especially when dealing with more complex discursive issues of a discursive nature. It is concluded that ChatGPT can be a useful tool to improve textual review, but its performance is not capable of considering the author’s style and intention, as well as the nature of the speech in question. |
publishDate |
2023 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2023-12-29 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://periodicos.pucminas.br/index.php/cadernoscespuc/article/view/32041 10.5752/P.2358-3231.2023n44p163-189 |
url |
http://periodicos.pucminas.br/index.php/cadernoscespuc/article/view/32041 |
identifier_str_mv |
10.5752/P.2358-3231.2023n44p163-189 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
por |
language |
por |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
http://periodicos.pucminas.br/index.php/cadernoscespuc/article/view/32041/21963 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2023 Editora PUC Minas https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0 info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2023 Editora PUC Minas https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0 |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Editora PUC Minas |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Editora PUC Minas |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Cadernos CESPUC de Pesquisa Série Ensaios; n. 44 (2023): Estudos linguísticos e os seus diferentes quadros teóricos ; 163-189 2358-3231 reponame:Cadernos CESPUC de Pesquisa instname:Pontifícia Universidade Católica de Minas Gerais (PUC Minas) instacron:PUC_MINS |
instname_str |
Pontifícia Universidade Católica de Minas Gerais (PUC Minas) |
instacron_str |
PUC_MINS |
institution |
PUC_MINS |
reponame_str |
Cadernos CESPUC de Pesquisa |
collection |
Cadernos CESPUC de Pesquisa |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Cadernos CESPUC de Pesquisa - Pontifícia Universidade Católica de Minas Gerais (PUC Minas) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
cespuc@pucminas.br||cespuc@pucminas.br |
_version_ |
1816338858910941184 |