2026· Bakhtiniana: Revista de Estudos do Discurso· 0 citations· 3 references
TL;DR
It is argued there are three human language singularizing aspects (referentiality, corporeality, and enunciation sensibility), which may not be reproduced by machines, and nowadays there is a clash and an entanglement between these two symbolisms.
Abstract
ABSTRACT Increasing world digitalization has provoked the emergence of new interaction modes. Emergence of computer programs that may produce texts modifies the enunciator concept itself. Algorithms, which are simple math instructions, now also seem to produce language. Therefore, we come up with the following questioning: What is the threshold between what we understand as our language, and the language of the machine? We argue there are three human language singularizing aspects (referentiality, corporeality, and enunciation sensibility), which may not be reproduced by machines. Our arguments are initially guided by the distinction between two opposing symbolic orders: human language, composed by a linguistic sign system; and machine language, consisting of order signs (numerical signs). We reason nowadays there is a clash and an entanglement between these two symbolisms.
It is argued that contemporary linguistic proficiency depends on an individual's capacity for bidirectional code-switching between rapid digital vernaculars and formalized academic registers.
The role of AI-driven technologies—including deepfakes and algorithmic amplification—in producing and circulating deceptive narratives designed to manipulate public perception is investigated and language, particularly through strategic mistranslation and narrative reframing, is weaponized to serve ideological interest...
The paper examines whether AI-generated texts can serve as authentic input when engaged through three stages: interaction with text, decoding and interpretation of meaning, and contextually appropriate response production, and considers the dual role of AI as both a source of linguistic input and a mediation tool suppo...
Mehran Esfandiari, Mir Wais Gawhary· International Journal of Eng...· 0 citations
A distinctive creative atmosphere, dialogue, and the application of ‘language for oneself’ (in Juri Lotman’s terms), along with other features, characterize the intellectual environment of the Tartu–Moscow School of Semiotics. These elements are vividly reflected in the 1960s correspondence between Juri Lotman and Bori...
Ewelina Pilarczyk, Tatjana Kuzovkina· Sign Systems Studies· 0 citations
Digital environments have changed forms of linguistic interaction by increasing the speed at which messages circulate, diversifying interlocutors, and integrating verbal, visual, auditory, and audiovisual resources. In these practices, abbreviations, emojis, memes, neologisms, features of orality, and multimodal combin...
Kátia Roberta Rodrigues Pinto· Revista de Estudos Interdisc...· 0 citations
Although the computational and technological dimension enables new forms of production and dissemination, the humorous constitution basically takes into account the same linguistic-discursive procedures that are recurrent in non-digital humorous texts.
C. R. Muniz, Sírio Possenti· Bakhtiniana: Revista de Estu...· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.
