Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/10553/134895
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorMorales Fernández, Beatriz Dominiqueen_US
dc.date.accessioned2024-12-02T18:12:59Z-
dc.date.available2024-12-02T18:12:59Z-
dc.date.issued2024en_US
dc.identifier.isbn9781032733425en_US
dc.identifier.otherScopus-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10553/134895-
dc.description.abstractArtificial intelligence (AI) is here to stay, although its definition already generates difficulties: a combination of algorithms that generates machines to represent the same abilities of any human, including the manifestation of their thinking, their capacity for linguistic receptivity, and their corresponding response. At the moment, AIs are more than consolidated in our daily lives: systems that think like us, see artificial neural networks; systems that act similarly to our nature, such as robots; and systems that act rationally, such as artificial agents. And that is where the immense problem comes in: linking reasoning and its linguistic expression to an exact logic of unequivocal response. Limiting ourselves in our systematic linguistic codes. The search for information, a procedure by which any human being can select and synthesize specific data for the writing and consolidation of a critical point of view about a topic of possible informative interest, through these artificial agents has been centralized, mainly in the GPT Chat. Currently, adolescents and adults search using keywords for a developed linguistic mechanism where specific and interrelated ideas are centralized, without the need to select and present, in a philological way, the conclusions of the finding. However, this AI is imperfect, because it does not have the freshness of an interpretation, by centralizing all development in unitary responses that anyone can select and appropriate, all having the same thing. Through a qualitative study developed, we will analyze the linguistic limitations of GPT Chat and other AI that limit humanistic grammatical development and correct use of textual properties: adequacy, coherence, and cohesion. A series of AIs that, even through subversive language, seek to camouflage their own linguistic limitation is ChatGPTzero. Intelligences that even transform a written process into an oral manifest is Synthesia.en_US
dc.languageengen_US
dc.publisherTaylor & Francis Groupen_US
dc.relation.ispartofRevolutionizing Communication: The Role Of Artificial Intelligence
dc.sourceRevolutionizing Communication: The Role of Artificial Intelligence / Raquel V. Benítez Rojas, Francisco-Julián Martínez-Cano (Eds.), p. 58-68en_US
dc.subject57 Lingüísticaen_US
dc.subject120304 Inteligencia artificialen_US
dc.subject.otherComunicaciónen_US
dc.subject.otherLimitación lingüística Chat GPTen_US
dc.titleThe Linguistic Effects of Artificial Intelligence on the Adequacy, Coherence, and Cohesion of Texts: What Do We Stop Telling in the New Digital Age?en_US
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/bookParten_US
dc.typeBookParten_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1201/9781003473633-6en_US
dc.identifier.scopus85209829121-
dc.contributor.orcidNO DATA-
dc.contributor.authorscopusid59419847900-
dc.description.lastpage68en_US
dc.description.firstpage58en_US
dc.investigacionArtes y Humanidadesen_US
dc.type2Capítulo de libroen_US
dc.description.numberofpages11en_US
dc.utils.revisionen_US
dc.date.coverdateEnero 2024en_US
dc.identifier.ulpgcen_US
dc.identifier.ulpgcen_US
dc.identifier.ulpgcen_US
dc.identifier.ulpgcen_US
dc.contributor.buulpgcBU-HUMen_US
dc.contributor.buulpgcBU-HUMen_US
dc.contributor.buulpgcBU-HUMen_US
dc.contributor.buulpgcBU-HUMen_US
item.grantfulltextnone-
item.fulltextSin texto completo-
crisitem.author.fullNameMorales Fernández, Beatriz Dominique-
Appears in Collections:Capítulo de libro
Show simple item record

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Share



Export metadata



Items in accedaCRIS are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.