Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Researchers find evidence of ChatGPT buzzwords turning up in everyday speech

news.fsu.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 381 posts

Re: Researchers find evidence of ChatGPT buzzwords turning up in everyday speech

#351

Post by viccis »

jibal wrote: post #344
slipperydippery wrote: post #337

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's the error? I'd hyphenate "poorly-composed" (most wouldn't these days, but they can go to hell) and I think it's a bit too wordy for what it's communicating, but I don't see what I'd call an actual error. I would personally avoid writing that "poorly composed sentences" have an "affect"—rather than the writer having or presenting an affect, or the sentences' tone being affected —as I find an implied anthropomor…

> What's the error? a) prose doesn't have intentions ... it should be "prose intended to" b) "effect of", not "affect of" > I don't see what I'd call an actual error. That's a serious problem. It's downright weird that you thought he was actually talking about affect (the noun). This is an old conversation ... I won't revisit it.

>b) "effect of", not "affect of"

Oh no, oh lord lmao

I meant "affect" and not "effect." You need to learn what affect means. I'm not asking you to learn about affect theory, but ffs no part of my sentence implied it meant "effect" and not "affect." Ugh. It doesn't even make sense. What would the "effect" of "poorly composed sentences" be? Only affect makes sense there.

Re: Researchers find evidence of ChatGPT buzzwords turning up in everyday speech

#352

Post by viccis »

slipperydippery wrote: post #345
jibal wrote: post #344

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What's the error? a) prose doesn't have intentions ... it should be "prose intended to" b) "effect of", not "affect of" > I don't see what I'd call an actual error. That's a serious problem. It's downright weird that you thought he was actually talking about affect (the noun). This is an old conversation ... I won't revisit it.

I read it as the word aff-ect, not uh-ffect (American pronunciation; both are spelled “affect”). Noun sense of “affect”, not verb. But it’s possible I was reading too generously and this was a botched attempt to employ “effect”, which would also fit (and better, I think).

It was meant to be "affect," but I'm curious what you think the possible "effect" of poorly written sentences I could have meant?

Re: Researchers find evidence of ChatGPT buzzwords turning up in everyday speech

#353

Post by viccis »

johnnienaked wrote: post #250
viccis wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good. It's a crutch for poorly composed sentences or for prose intending to imitate the affect of poorly composed sentences. There's not a single sentence under the sun that needs an emdash. Commas and parentheses can do it all, and an excess of either is a sign of poorly edited prose. I don't buy the pro-clanker pro-em dash movement that has come out of nowhere in the past several years.

Misused affect/effect there bub

No "bub" I used it correctly. Review your effect/affect noun distinctions and try again. Google "affect theory" if that makes it easier.

Re: Researchers find evidence of ChatGPT buzzwords turning up in everyday speech

#354

Post by wink »

redwall_hp wrote: post #321
wink wrote: post #298

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ESL here, not Chinese. I find meticulous to be a perfectly normal word, I think I don't really use it, but I think I read it from time to time, but maybe I just read some sort of publication by a fan of the word? :) Same for surpass and boast, I think I use "surpass expectations" and I had to think for a moment, I would use 'brag' these days but pretty sure in school I learned boast, which sounds more formal BE to me…

They're all perfectly normal words that literate people use. The problem is the typical American struggles to read beyond a fifth grade level and is actively hostile toward more advanced vocabulary, as the country is deeply anti-intellectual overall. ChatGPT, of course, behaves like its training set...and the majority of that set is professional writers' published works, which would be more likely to use words like t…

Maybe I skimmed the article and didn't look for specifics enough, because I did not see a bias towards any level of education. But of course I am biased myself, probably using all the fancy words and still making grammatical errors like a fifth grader, and iirc I did not have a native American coworker (aka people with whom I regularly talk and not just write) for 10 years, only other ESLs and some British people.

Re: Researchers find evidence of ChatGPT buzzwords turning up in everyday speech

#355

Post by johnnienaked »

viccis wrote: post #353
johnnienaked wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Misused affect/effect there bub

No "bub" I used it correctly. Review your effect/affect noun distinctions and try again. Google "affect theory" if that makes it easier.

"Poorly constructed sentences" don't have an a-ffect, unless you mean the irritance your poorly constructed sentence brought up in this thread.

Re: Researchers find evidence of ChatGPT buzzwords turning up in everyday speech

#356

Post by johnnienaked »

viccis wrote: post #351
jibal wrote: post #344

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What's the error? a) prose doesn't have intentions ... it should be "prose intended to" b) "effect of", not "affect of" > I don't see what I'd call an actual error. That's a serious problem. It's downright weird that you thought he was actually talking about affect (the noun). This is an old conversation ... I won't revisit it.

>b) "effect of", not "affect of" Oh no, oh lord lmao I meant "affect" and not "effect." You need to learn what affect means. I'm not asking you to learn about affect theory, but ffs no part of my sentence implied it meant "effect" and not "affect." Ugh. It doesn't even make sense. What would the "effect" of "poorly composed sentences" be? Only affect makes sense there.

You know that affect means to have an effect on something right?

Re: Researchers find evidence of ChatGPT buzzwords turning up in everyday speech

#357

Post by nxobject »

auxbuss wrote: post #341
MathMonkeyMan wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I use space-hyphen-hyphen-space because I'm always switching between systems and keyboards -- it works well enough.

Space en-dash space is standard British typography – whereas US uses em-dash and jams the words together on either side of it. It took centuries for the written word to acquire spaces between words, and then the US decided to jam them back together again. Curious why folk are using two hyphens "--" instead of en-dash.

I imagine for the same reason some still use two spaces after full stops - typewriter conventions.

Re: Researchers find evidence of ChatGPT buzzwords turning up in everyday speech

#358

Post by tpoacher »

milancurcic wrote: post #4

"Recent large-scale upticks in the use of words like “delve” and “intricate” in certain fields, especially education and academic writing, are attributed to the widespread introduction of LLMs with a chat function, like ChatGPT, that overuses those buzzwords." OK, but please don't do what pg did a year or so ago and dismiss anyone who wrote "delve" as AI writing. I've been using "delve" in speech for 15+ years. It's…

Sounds intricate

Re: Researchers find evidence of ChatGPT buzzwords turning up in everyday speech

#360

Post by slipperydippery »

johnnienaked wrote: post #356
viccis wrote: post #351

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>b) "effect of", not "affect of" Oh no, oh lord lmao I meant "affect" and not "effect." You need to learn what affect means. I'm not asking you to learn about affect theory, but ffs no part of my sentence implied it meant "effect" and not "affect." Ugh. It doesn't even make sense. What would the "effect" of "poorly composed sentences" be? Only affect makes sense there.

You know that affect means to have an effect on something right?

The noun sense does not.
Post reply on HN