0

In my daily writing, I criticize language-learning apps that say blindly tell students "you're really great" etc.:

虽然鼓励学生是老师必不可少责任之一，但是app盲目、过多、肤浅地夸大孩子有什么用呢？

ChatGPT changed it to this

虽然鼓励学生是老师必不可少的责任之一，但是app过度、过多地强调这些方面对孩子的实际语言学习帮助有限。

It's thoroughly changed my adjectives, and rephrased it from a rhetorical question. It seems to change the meaning a bit: emphasizing excessive, rather than superficial. I wanted to emphasize how the app doesn't have any idea if the student is excellent; it's programmed to say that. (Oops! I just noticed I wrote 孩子, but it should be 学生 or something similar.)

Question: Which is better, mine or ChatGPT's?

I'm hoping to get a writing critique here: feedback (pros and cons) on my writing and ChatGPT's writing, and feel free to rephrase it in your own style too.

Becky 李蓓
  • 16,291
  • 9
  • 49
  • 165

2 Answers2

1

Question: Which is better, mine or ChatGPT's?

As long as the sentences are grammatical and logical there's no better or worse between them.

However, the sentence by ChatGPT here sounds more logical. "blindly and superficially" are more suitable for describing human flaws. Machines would do things blindly or superficially is only a human perception. They can't think like a human, therefore, applying human flaws to them is unsounded unless you don't want to highlight the difference between humans and machines, and treat ChatGPT like a real-life teacher.

  • You wrote "... 肤浅地夸大孩子" I suggest "... 肤浅地夸赞孩子" or "... 肤浅地夸大孩子的成功

  • ChatGPT wrote "... 过度、过多地强调这些方面" I suggest "... 过度、过多的称赞"

Tang Ho
  • 78,643
  • 4
  • 28
  • 71
1

Yes, ChatGPT has altered your meaning. I would modify the sentence to:

虽然鼓励学生是老师必不可少的责任之一，但是app's"一味不具/真實的稱讚"對孩子的學習有什么用呢？

r13
  • 12,912
  • 1
  • 7
  • 26