SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Turkophone / 2026 / Cilt: 2026

A Comparative Analysis of Passive Voice Usage in Informative Texts Produced by Turkish Language Learners, Native Speakers, and AI Tools

Türkçe Bilgilendirici Metinlerde Edilgen Kullanımı: Anadili Konuşucuları, Yabancı Dil Öğrencileri Ve Yapay Zeka Üretimleri

Emine Köleci(DOKUZ EYLÜL ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0002-8294-1511
Betül Çetin(DOKUZ EYLÜL ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0002-0287-2924
Funda Uzdu Yıldız(DOKUZ EYLÜL ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0003-1813-5432
Journal
Turkophone
Pages
1–22
Publication Date
2026-06-05
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The findings indicate that the passive voice rate is 17.51% in AI-generated texts and 21.22% in texts produced by native speakers of Turkish, suggesting that the two groups exhibit comparable rates of passive voice use.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:In the field of language teaching, studies drawing on learner output are of considerable importance alongside research on language teaching methods and techniques.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Comparing learner outputs with those produced by AI tools is significant both for identifying the role of AI in language teaching and for describing the similarities and differences between AI-generated texts and those produced by native speakers.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The findings indicate that the passive voice rate is 17.51% in AI-generated texts and 21.22% in texts produced by native speakers of Turkish, suggesting that the two groups exhibit comparable rates of passive voice use.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:bilgilendirici metin · edilgen yapı · yabancı dil olarak Türkçe öğretimi

Abstract

In the field of language teaching, studies drawing on learner output are of considerable importance alongside research on language teaching methods and techniques. In recent years, the number of studies examining the linguistic outputs of artificial intelligence tools has also been increasing. Comparing learner outputs with those produced by AI tools is significant both for identifying the role of AI in language teaching and for describing the similarities and differences between AI-generated texts and those produced by native speakers. This qualitative study compares informational texts produced by advanced-level Turkish learners who completed the Turkish preparatory program at DEDAM, informational texts written by undergraduate students in the Department of Linguistics, and informational texts generated by artificial intelligence, with respect to the use of passive voice constructions. The topic assigned for the informational texts was "The Positive and Negative Effects of Artificial Intelligence on Our Lives." This study aimed to determine the rate of passive voice use in informational texts written by native speakers of Turkish and learners of Turkish as a foreign language, and to compare these rates with passive voice use in AI-generated texts. The findings indicate that the passive voice rate is 17.51% in AI-generated texts and 21.22% in texts produced by native speakers of Turkish, suggesting that the two groups exhibit comparable rates of passive voice use. However, among learners of Turkish as a foreign language, this rate remains at 7.12%. Although an increase in passive voice use was observed following academic Turkish courses, the increase was found to be statistically non-significant. In this regard, it can be concluded that additional instructional support regarding the use of passive constructions in informational texts is needed within academic Turkish language programs.

Özet

Dil öğretimi alanında, dil öğretim yöntem ve tekniklerine ilişkin araştırmaların yanında öğrencilerin üretimlerinden yola çıkılarak yapılan çalışmalar önem taşımaktadır. Son dönemde yapay zeka araçlarının dilsel üretimleri ile ilgili çalışmaların sayısı da artmaktadır. Öğrenci üretimleri ve yapay zeka araçlarının üretimlerinin karşılaştırılması hem dil öğretiminde yapay zeka araçlarının rolüne yönelik saptamalar ortaya koyması hem de yapay zeka üretimlerinin, anadili konuşucularının üretimleri ile benzerlik ve farklılıklarının betimlenmesi açısından önemlidir. Nitel araştırma özelliği taşıyan bu çalışmada, DEDAM’da Türkçe hazırlık eğitimini tamamlamış ileri düzey Türkçe öğrencilerinin ürettikleri bilgilendirici metinler, Dilbilim Bölümü lisans öğrencilerinin ürettikleri bilgilendirici metinler ve yapay zeka tarafından oluşturulmuş bilgilendirici metinler, edilgen yapının kullanımı açısından karşılaştırılmıştır. Öğrencilerden yazmaları istenen bilgilendirici metinlerin konusu “Yapay Zekanın Hayatımıza Olumlu ve Olumsuz Etkileri” olarak belirlenmiştir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Köleci, E., Çetin, B., Yıldız, F. U. (2026). A Comparative Analysis of Passive Voice Usage in Informative Texts Produced by Turkish Language Learners, Native Speakers, and AI Tools. Turkophone, Cilt: 2026, 1–22. https://doi.org/10.55246/turkophone.1600427

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (13)

  1. Aksan, Y., & Mersinli, Ü. (2017). Biçimbirim dizilerinin farklı metin türlerindeki görünümleri [Appearances of morpheme sequences in different text types]. In B. Makaroğlu, İ. P. Pınar, & E. Bekar (Eds.), 30. Ulusal Dilbilim Kurultayı Bildirileri [Proceedings of the 30th National Linguistics Congress] (pp. 35–41). Dilbilim Derneği Yayınları.
  2. Balcı, A., & Gökçe, B. (2022). İlkokul 4. sınıf Türkçe ders kitaplarındaki metinlerin tutarlılık görünümleri [Coherence aspects of texts in 4th grade primary school Turkish textbooks]. RumeliDE Dil ve Edebiyat Araştırmaları Dergisi, (31), 380–401. https://doi.org/10.29000/rumelide.1221537
  3. Brinker, K., & Ausborn-Brinker, S. (1997). Linguistische Textanalyse: Eine Einführung in Grundbegriffe und Methoden [Linguistic text analysis: An introduction to basic concepts and methods] (4th ed.). Erich Schmidt.
  4. Duke, N. K. (2004). The case for informational text. Educational Leadership, 61(6), 40–45.
  5. Emeksiz, Z. E. (2015). Stance taking and passive voice in Turkish academic discourse. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 11(2), 13–22. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/jlls/issue/36118/405573
  6. Faigley, L., & Meyer, P. (1983). Rhetorical theory and readers' classifications of text types. Text: Interdisciplinary Journal for the Study of Discourse, 3(4), 305–326.
  7. Güler, P., Gülşenoğlu, S., & Sayılır, M. (2025). Akademik yazmada kullanılabilecek yapay zekâ araçlarının sınıflandırılması [Classification of artificial intelligence tools that can be used in academic writing]. Eğitim Bilimleri Tematik Araştırmalar Dergisi, 1(2), 76–97.
  8. İşler, B., & Kılıç, M. (2021). Eğitimde yapay zekâ kullanımı ve gelişimi [The use and development of artificial intelligence in education]. Yeni Medya Elektronik Dergisi, 5(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.17932/IAU.EJNM.25480200.2021/ejnm_v5i1001
  9. Keatinge, D., & Keßler, J. U. (2009). The acquisition of the passive voice in L2 English: Perception and production. In Research in Second Language Acquisition: Empirical Evidence Across Languages (pp. 67–92).
  10. Mutlu, E. (2025). Yaratıcılığın sınırları: Yapay zekâ yaratıcılığına bir bakış [The limits of creativity: A look at artificial intelligence creativity]. Moment Dergi, 11(2), 422–446.
  11. Oflaz-Köleci, E., & Çetin, B. (2024). Yabancı dil olarak Türkçe öğrenen ileri düzey öğrencilerin yazma metinlerinin öznellik görünümleri [Subjectivity aspects of written texts by advanced learners of Turkish as a foreign language]. In Y. Alan, M. Hüküm, Ö. Göktaş, & H. İlçioğlu (Eds.), İki dillilere ve yabancılara Türkçe öğretiminde güncel tartışmalar [Current debates in teaching Turkish to bilinguals and foreign language learners] (pp. 37–57). Duvar Yayınları.
  12. Smith, C. S. (2003). Modes of discourse: The local structure of texts. Cambridge University Press.
  13. Virtanen, T. (1992). Discourse functions of adverbial placement in English: Clause-initial adverbials of time and place in narratives and procedural place descriptions. Åbo Akademis Förlag. Yannuar, N., Shitadevi, I. A., Basthomi, Y., & Widiati, U. (2014). Active and passive voice constructions by Indonesian student writers. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 4(7), 1400–1408. https://doi.org/10.4304/tpls.4.7.1400-1408