WHILE artificial intelligence has much to offer to language, communication, education and society, it may also erode linguistic creativity. This may be in relation to English in particular, the global lingua franca, which provides almost 90 per cent of the training data for generative AI systems.
Specifically, our concern is the linguistic creativity by non-native speakers of English. They are a clear demographic majority as there are three times more such speakers of English than its native speakers globally. Practically, more communication involving English now takes place within the former community than in the latter. Nevertheless, non-native speaker creativity in English has been slow to win recognition. For a long time, English language learners have been viewed as shadows of native speakers. They are supposed to pursue native-speaker competence as the only legitimate learning goal. Their learning journey starts from their first/native language, and they travel up to the almost unreachable ideal of native-speaker ability. For most of them, the journey ends long before they reach the destination. A few who are lingua-savvy may climb the height, but they may still not be considered native speakers due to, among other factors, the colour of their skin. Fortunately, things have been changing with non-native speakers of English outnumbering native speakers, but the pace has been much slower than expected.
It is the linguistic creativity of these learners and speakers of English that is my point. They are located at all stages of their language learning and using trajectory. Certainly, they don’t make one homogenous group. The contexts and circumstances of their English learning are different; different is also the extent of the use of English in their everyday life.
Nonetheless, many can be creative in English, with all their mistakes, idiosyncrasies and imperfections. As AI comes to dominate our language life and communication, this creativity is likely to disappear.
How may that happen?
Creativity in language can’t be associated only with native intuition or linguistic expertise. It also arises when speakers try to communicate with limited language skills. Linguistic creativity can emerge even from errors or imperfect learning when there is an urge for self-expression. For example, the innovative expression ‘Long time, no see’ is grammatically incorrect, yet its innovative expression of emotion is unique and undeniable. The origin of this expression is debated but it is widely viewed as an example of pidgin English which originated in a Chinese-English contact situation. The innovator of this creativity did not have perfect English. However, their limited linguistic ability to survive the communicative imperative gifted a profound expression to the English language.
This innovation is now considered part of mainstream English. Its grammatical oddity may not invite language policing or an orthodox English teacher using their red pen. It’s a classic example of how something that is an error at origin can travel a long way to be accepted as a legitimate expression.
Alas! with AI, speakers of pidgin English may not venture into such creative expressions. As people rely more on AI for writing and other communication, the everyday creativity through linguistic struggle may vanish. It is critical to appreciate this hidden loss of human creativity as native speaker-controlled AI dominates communication, life and society.
Another example is a historical letter which is currently on display at the Railway Museum in New Delhi. As reproduced below, it was written by one Okhil Chandra Sen to the divisional railway office in 1909 during British colonial rule in India. The ungrammatical text authored by a half-educated Indian man marked his complaint, also pointing to the limits of his linguistic ability.
‘I am arrive by passenger train Ahmedpur station and my belly is too much swelling with jackfruit. I am therefore went to privy. Just I doing the nuisance that guard making whistle blow for train to go off and I am running with ‘lotah’ in one hand and ‘dhoti’ in the next when I am fall over and expose all my shocking toman and female women on plateform. I am got leaved at Ahmedpur station. This too much bad, if passenger go to make dung that dam guard not wait train five minutes for him. I am therefore pray your honour to make big fine on that guard for public sake. Otherwise I am making big report! to papers.’
If we ask ChatGPT or another AI tool, it can do a good translation of this ‘broken’ English into British or American variety. But the writer’s meaning can be deciphered even from the non-standard text. His communicative intention is not lost in ungrammaticality or linguistic border crossing. Trains in those days didn’t have toilets in India. As the train that carried Mr Sen stopped at the noted station, he got off to respond to the call of nature in the open space. However, the train left before he was able to return to board it. As he was running to catch the train managing his dhoti and water pot, he ended up exposing himself to the surrounding world.
People may judge his English in any way they like. The judgment may depend on whether one is a linguistic puritan or a liberal. To me, this is real English in the life circumstances of this man and his Indian social surroundings. Expecting him to be able to write immaculate British or American English or even a more polished Indian variety will be unreasonable. Our language reflects our life and situations. It can’t be too distant from our social existence. However, what is noteworthy is the urge to communicate, despite the limited ability. Despite all oddities, I am happy to consider it an innovative text that successfully communicated the message. I can’t but appreciate the linguistic graciousness of the audience who took the message and ignored the grammar.
We shouldn’t forget that this letter of complaint led to introducing toilets in Indian trains. As speakers of standard English, we may police the language, but we can’t undermine the impact it had. It is this achievement that has made the letter an artefact to be displayed in a museum.
Unfortunately, with AI tools in our hand, we may not see such creativity or innovation in language use. We may not even exert our intellectual, cognitive or creative labour. We will ask AI and it will do what we want done. We may even stop struggling with English.
Instead of experimenting on their own, nonnative speakers may use AI to produce correct language at the expense of their creative potential. While this makes communication easier, it may also eliminate their creative urge and homogenise the linguistic diversity that non-native speakers bring.
This potential loss of linguistic creativity will be a loss of humanity, human culture and civilisation.
Obaidul Hamid is an associate professor at the University of Queensland in Australia. He researches language, education and society in the developing world. He is a co‑editor of Current Issues in Language Planning.
Editor: Nurul Kabir, Published by the Chairman, Editorial Board ASM Shahidullah Khan on behalf of Media New Age Ltd.
+8802-9632245-48
[email protected]
For Advertisement, Cell: +8801849 263831
Email: [email protected]
Leave a Reply