Why are people starting to sound like ChatGPT - Adam Aleksic
You're listening to ted talks' daily where we bring you new ideas to spark your curiosity every day. I'm your host, elise Hu. Is AI changing the very way we talk? Etymologist and content creator Adam alexix sounds the alarm on how AI tools are influencing our behavior down to our very word choices.
（您正在收听TED Talks Daily，我们每天为您带来激发好奇的新想法。我是主持人Elise Hu。AI正在改变我们说话的方式吗？词源学家兼内容创作者Adam Aleksic敲响了警钟：AI工具如何影响我们的行为，乃至我们的具体用词。）
He encourages us to remember that these emerging tools are not neutral, and how they are possibly rewiring the very underlying patterns of our thoughts and why. Afterward, I sat down with Adam to go beyond his talk and learn more about what sounding human even means anymore, the tools we'll need to build as we continue down this rapidly changing path, and more stick around after his talk for our conversation.
（他提醒我们记住，这些新兴工具并非中立，以及它们如何可能重构我们思维的根本模式及其原因。之后，我坐下来与Adam进行了深入交流，探讨在他的演讲之外，“听起来像人”如今意味着什么，在这条快速变化的道路上我们需要构建哪些工具等。请在他的演讲之后留下来收听我们的对话。）
---
How sure are you that you can tell what's real online?
（你有多确定自己能辨别网上的东西是真实的？）
You might think it's easy to spot an obviously AI generated image, and you're probably aware that algorithms are biased in some way. But all the evidence is suggesting that we're pretty bad at understanding that on a subconscious level.
（你可能认为很容易发现明显的AI生成图像，你也可能意识到算法在某种程度上存在偏见。但所有证据都表明，我们在潜意识层面很难理解这一点。）
Take for example, the growing perception gap in America. We keep over and overestimating how extreme other people's political beliefs are. And this is only getting worse with social media because algorithms show us the most extreme picture of reality.
（以美国日益增长的认知差距为例。我们总是不断高估他人政治信仰的极端程度。而社交媒体让情况变得更糟，因为算法向我们展示了最极端的现实图景。）
As an etymologist and content creator, I always see controversial messages go more viral because they generate more engagement than a neutral perspective. But that means we all end up seeing this more extreme version of reality, and we're clearly starting to confuse that with actual reality.
（作为一名词源学家和内容创作者，我总是看到有争议的信息传播得更广，因为它们比中性观点能产生更多的互动。但这意味着我们最终都看到了这个更极端的现实版本，而我们显然开始将其与实际现实混淆。）
The same thing is currently happening with AI chat bots, because you probably assume that chatiptt is speaking English to you, except it's not speaking English in the same way that the algorithm's not showing you reality. There are always distortions depending on what goes into the model and how it's trained.
（同样的事情目前正发生在AI聊天机器人身上，因为你可能以为ChatGPT在对你讲英语，但事实并非如此——就像算法向你展示的不是现实一样。根据输入模型的数据及其训练方式，总是存在扭曲。）
Like we know that chaditt says delve at way higher rates than usual, possibly because openai outsourced its training process to workers in Nigeria who do actually say delve more frequently over time, though that little linguistic over representresation got reinforced into the model even more than in the workers' own dialects. Now that's affecting everybody's language. Multiple studies have found that since chjbt came out, people everywhere have been saying the word delved more in spontaneous spoken conversation.
（比如我们知道ChatGPT使用“delve”一词的频率远高于*常，可能是因为OpenAI将其训练过程外包给了尼日利亚的工人，这些工人确实会更多地使用“delve”。随着时间的推移，这种微小的语言过度表征在模型中被强化，甚至超过了工人们自己方言中的使用频率。现在这正在影响每个人的语言。多项研究发现，自ChatGPT问世以来，世界各地的人们在自发口语对话中使用“delve”一词的次数增加了。）
---
Essentially, we're subconsciously confusing the AI version of language with actual language, but that means that the real thing is ironically getting closer to the machine version of the thing. We're in a positive feedback loop, with the AI representing reality, us thinking that's the real reality, and then regurgitating it so that the AI can be Fed more of our data.
（本质上，我们在潜意识中将AI版本的语言与实际语言混淆，但这意味着讽刺的是，真实的东西正越来越接近机器的版本。我们处于一个正反馈循环中：AI代表现实，我们以为那就是真正的现实，然后将其复述出来，这样AI就能被喂食更多我们的数据。）
You can also see this happening with the algorithm through words like hyper pop, which wasn't really part of our cultural lexicon until Spotify noticed an emerging cluster of similar users in their algorithm. As soon as they identified it and introduced a hyper pot playlist, however, the aesthetic was given a direction.
（你也能通过像“hyper pop”这样的词看到算法中发生的这种情况。“hyper pop”本不是我们文化词典的一部分，直到Spotify在其算法中发现了一群新兴的相似用户。然而，一旦他们识别出来并引入了“hyper pop”播放列表，这种美学就被赋予了方向。）
Now people began to debate what did and did not qualify as hyper pop. The label and the playlist made the phenomenon more real by giving them something to identify with or against. And as more people identified with hyper pop, more musicians also started making hyper pop music.
（现在人们开始争论什么算、什么不算hyper pop。这个标签和播放列表通过让人们有东西可以认同或反对，使这一现象变得更加真实。随着越来越多的人认同hyper pop，更多音乐人也开始制作hyper pop音乐。）
All the while, the cluster of similar listeners and the algorithm grew larger and larger, and Spotify kept pushing it more and more, because these platforms want to amplify cultural trends to keep you on the APP.
（与此同时，相似的听众群和算法变得越来越大，Spotify也不断地越来越大力地推广它，因为这些*台想要放大文化趋势，以让你留在APP上。）
But that means we also lose the distinction between a real trend and an artificially inflated trend. And yet, this is how all fads now enter the mainstream.
（但这意味着我们也失去了真实趋势和人为夸大趋势之间的区别。然而，现在所有的时尚都是这样进入主流的。）
---
We start with a latent cultural desire, like maybe some people are interested in matcha or la boo boo or Dubai chocolate. The algorithm identifies this desire and pushes it to similar users, making the phenomenon more of a thing. But again, just like how chatjituti misrepresented the word delve, the algorithm is probably misrepresenting reality.
（我们始于一种潜在的文化欲望，比如也许有些人对抹茶、la boo boo或迪拜巧克力感兴趣。算法识别出这种欲望，并将其推送给相似用户，使这种现象更像是那么回事。但同样，就像ChatGPT误传了“delve”这个词一样，算法很可能也在误传现实。）
Now more businesses are making the boo boo content because they think that's the desire. More influencers are also making the boo boo trends because we have to tap into trends to go viral. And yet, the algorithm is only showing you the visually provocative items that work in the video format.
（现在更多的企业正在制作boo boo内容，因为他们认为那就是欲望所在。更多的网红也在制造boo boo潮流，因为我们必须利用潮流才能走红。然而，算法只向你展示那些在视频格式中有效的、视觉上具有煽动性的内容。）
Tik tok has a limited idea of who you are as a user and there's no way that matches up with your complex desires as a human being. So we have a biased input. And that's assuming that social media is trying to faithfully represent reality, which it isn't. Instead, it's only trying to do. It's going to make money for them. It's in Spotify's interest, have you listening to hyper pop and it's in tikt tok's interest to have you looking at the boo boo because that's commodifiable.
（TikTok对你作为用户的认知是有限的，这与你作为一个人的复杂欲望不可能匹配。所以我们输入的数据是有偏差的。这还是假设社交媒体试图忠实呈现现实的情况下，而事实并非如此。相反，它只想做一件事：为他们赚钱。让你听hyper pop符合Spotify的利益，让你看boo boo符合TikTok的利益，因为那是可商品化的。）
So once again, we have this difference between reality and the representation of reality where they're actually constantly influencing one another. But it's incredibly dangerous to ignore that distinction, because this goes beyond our language and our consumptive behaviors. This affects the world we see as possible.
（所以，我们再一次看到了现实与其呈现之间的差异，而它们实际上在不断地相互影响。但忽略这种区别是极其危险的，因为这超越了我们的语言和消费行为。它影响着我们所认为的可能的世界。）
---
Evidence suggests that chiptt is more conservative when speaking the farsi language, likely because the limited trading texts in Iran reflect a more conservative political climate in the region. Does that mean that an Iranian chatgptt user will think more conservative thoughts?
（有证据表明，ChatGPT在讲波斯语时更为保守，很可能是因为伊朗有限的训练文本反映了该地区更为保守的政治气候。这是否意味着一位伊朗ChatGPT用户会产生更保守的想法？）
We know that Elon Musk regularly makes changes to his chatbot drock when he doesn't like how it's responding, and that he uses his platform X to artificially amplify his tweets. Does that mean that the millions of grok and ex users are subconsciously being trained to align with Musk's ideology?
（我们知道，当Elon Musk不喜欢他的聊天机器人Grok的回应方式时，他会定期进行修改，并且他利用他的*台X人为地放大他的推文。这是否意味着数以百万计的Grok和X用户正在潜意识中被训练得与Musk的意识形态保持一致？）
We need to constantly remember that these aren't neutral tools. Everything that ends up in your social media feed or in your chat bot responses is actually filtered through many layers of what's good for the platform, what makes money, and what conforms to the platform's incorrect idea about who you are.
（我们需要时刻记住，这些不是中立的工具。最终出现在你社交媒体信息流或聊天机器人回复中的所有内容，实际上都经过了多层的过滤：什么对*台有利、什么能赚钱，以及什么符合*台对你的错误认知。）
When we ignore this, we view reality through a constant survivorship bias, which affects our understanding of the world. After all, if you're talking more like chat tptt, you're probably thinking more like tptt as well, or tiktok or Spotify. But you can fight this if you constantly ask yourself why? Why am I saying this? Why am I saying this? Why am I thinking this? And why is the platform rewarding this?
（当我们忽略这一点时，我们就是通过一种持续存在的“幸存者偏差”来看待现实，这影响了我们对世界的理解。毕竟，如果你的说话方式越来越像ChatGPT，你的思维方式可能也越来越像它，或者像TikTok或Spotify。但你可以对抗这一点，只要你不断地问自己：为什么？我为什么这么说？我为什么这么想？*台为什么奖励这个？）
If you don't ask yourself these questions, their version of reality is going to become your version of reality. So stay real.
（如果你不问自己这些问题，他们对现实的看法将成为你对现实的看法。所以，保持真实。）
---
Congratulations on your talk. How are you feeling now that you're doing feeling good? Tell us, what made you so curious about language in the first place and how you got hooked?
（恭喜你的演讲。现在感觉怎么样？感觉很好？告诉我们，最初是什么让你对语言如此好奇，你又是如何沉迷其中的？）
Yeah, wow. Etymology in particular. I always like to tell people it comes from the Greek word eomos meaning truth. So you look at etymology and you're actually studying truth. You're studying how humans understand the world, how we relate that to other people.
（是的，哇。尤其是词源学。我总是喜欢告诉人们，它来自希腊词“eomos”，意思是真理。所以你看词源学，实际上是在研究真理。你在研究人类如何理解世界，我们如何将其与他人联系起来。）
In sophomore year of high school, I read this etymology book, I got super into it and then I just started like really studying it more for myself. I started a little website in high school. I started linguistics in college and then I was graduating with a linguistics degree and I was like, well what do I do now? So I started making linguistics content and then actively sort of studying the language of the social media space as I was in it. And then wrote a book, I'll go speak on how social media is changing language and then that ended up getting me the ted talk.
（在高二那年，我读了一本词源学的书，我对此非常着迷，然后就开始为自己更深入地研究它。我在高中时建立了一个小网站。大学我开始学习语言学，然后带着语言学学位毕业时，我在想，我现在该做什么？于是我开始制作语言学内容，然后积极地研究我所处的社交媒体空间的语言。接着写了一本书，书中探讨社交媒体如何改变语言，最终这让我得到了这次TED演讲的机会。）
---
Is there a problem with social media changing language because our language has always evolved? This is a living and dynamic thing, right? English or any other language in the world, so. Is there anything wrong with it?
（社交媒体改变语言有问题吗？因为我们的语言一直在演变。这是一个活生生的、动态的东西，对吧？英语或世界上任何其他语言都是如此。那么这有什么问题吗？）
No, and our language has always evolved around the constraints of a medium. Right before we had written history we would rely on oral tradition. We would tell stories through rhyme and meter and then we started writing things down. The places that used leaves to write things down developed curly scripts because that was better for the leaves and the places that used clay and stone to write things down, develop rigid scripts.
（没有，而且我们的语言总是围绕着媒介的限制而演变。在有文字历史之前，我们依赖口述传统。我们通过韵律和格律来讲述故事，然后我们开始把事情写下来。用树叶写字的地方发展出了弯曲的字体，因为那样对树叶更好；而用粘土和石头写字的地方，则发展出了刚硬的字体。）
So again the medium is literally shaping language. We have chapter books, we have the Internet. Internet allows for this written replication of informal speech. It's again kind of a paradigm shift in how we speak and I think algorithms are that new paradigm shift. AI is a new paradigm shift. We're in this like really fast paced moment where our language is rerouting around these new mediums we're interacting with.
（所以，媒介确实在塑造语言。我们有章节书，我们有互联网。互联网允许这种非正式口语的书面复制。这又是一种我们说话方式的范式转变，我认为算法就是那种新的范式转变。AI是一个新的范式转变。我们正处在这个非常快速的时刻，我们的语言正在围绕我们交互的这些新媒介重新调整路径。）
---
Yeah, you mentioned fast paced as an etymologist how are you managing the speed at which things are changing?
（是的，你提到了快速。作为一名词源学家，你如何应对事物变化的速度？）
Yeah, well it's it's really good for me that I am kind of studying things in the open. I make videos about phenomena I'm observing and then I get like tagged in videos. Where people are using new words, it's sort of crazy in that sense, but I also have to be in it. I scroll tik tock for for research, but you have to be in in the milieu to really know what you're studying.
（是的，嗯，对我来说，以开放的方式研究事物真的很有好处。我制作关于我观察到的现象的视频，然后我就会被@在人们使用新词的视频里。从某种意义上说，这有点疯狂，但我自己也必须身处其中。我刷TikTok是为了研究，但你必须身处那个环境才能真正了解你研究的东西。）
Everything's contextual. There's an aesthetic that words are evolving through. There are communities that words are evolving from. You have to understand at least like a little bit about Internet culture to know about these communities because there's so much depth to them.
（一切都关乎语境。词汇的演变有其特定的美学。词汇从特定的社区中演变而来。你至少需要对网络文化有一点了解才能知道这些社区，因为它们的内涵非常丰富。）
---
Right. And it strikes me that everything is changing, like we're talking. Just within a matter of days. A trend can emerge and then be gone and then be considered passe or old, which is at a much faster cadence and speed than, say, academia, where language was traditionally researched and linguistics was studied. What do you feel like are some? Trends this year in language that have come up and have really hit the zeitgeist that you have to explain the most.
（没错。让我印象深刻的是，一切都在变化，就像我们说的。短短几天内，一个趋势可能兴起，然后消失，然后就被认为是过时或老旧的，其节奏和速度比传统上研究语言和语言学的学术界要快得多。你觉得今年有哪些语言趋势真正击中了时代精神，是你解释得最多的？）
Yeah wow. Well we're definitely on the tail end of670. I feel like most people understand by now that that's this nonsensical interjection coming from meme communities originally parodying clip farming but there's been so much going on.
（是啊，哇。嗯，我们肯定处于“670”这个趋势的尾声了。我觉得现在大多数人都明白，那是来自模因社区的一种无意义的感叹词，最初是为了模仿“片段耕作”，但后来发生了很多事情。）
Yesterday I made a video about low kenly and I guarantee you by the time that this podcast airs that word will already be passe but it's like a combination of low key and genuinely and it's like true, you know genuinely. Yeah, okay it's not gonna sticker. It's like a meme word but that's exactly kind of illustrating how quickly these words come and go. I really doubt that'll be around beyond like a month.
（昨天我做了一个关于“low kenly”的视频，我向你保证，到这个播客播出时，那个词已经过时了。但它是“low key”和“genuinely”的结合，就像……真的，你知道，“genuinely”。是的，好吧，它不会流行起来。它就像一个模因词，但这恰恰说明了这些词来得快去得也快。我真的怀疑它的流行时间不会超过一个月。）
---
OK, I'm trying to go through what I'm hearing in my house. That sounds like nonsense because I have a13 year old and a10 year old and an eight year old. No matter how much you think you know they know more. So I have friends who are middle school teachers. Sometimes they let me sit down in their middle school classrooms and that's where you. Learn the culture and then like Gen z, older people parody their language and then it becomes brainw rod but it starts with Gen Alpha. Yeah I do like being called chat though instead of mom chat is funny and that's definitely a phenomenon that's gotten way more popular this year. I definitely started seeing that around2023 sort of as like ah a ah general evocative. What do we think chat you know and yeah it sort of reflects the rise of streaming culture and I've seen a lot of words come out of twitch spaces back when riz was popular that came from twitch.
（好吧，我试着回想我在家里听到的。那听起来像胡言乱语，因为我有一个13岁、一个10岁和一个8岁的孩子。无论你认为自己知道多少，他们知道的更多。所以我有些朋友是中学老师。有时他们让我坐在他们的中学教室里，那才是你学习文化的地方。然后是像Z世代，老一辈人模仿他们的语言，然后这变成了“brainw rod”，但它始于Alpha世代。是的，我确实喜欢被叫做“chat”而不是“妈妈”。“chat”很有趣，这绝对是今年变得流行得多的一种现象。我肯定在2023年左右开始看到这个，有点像……呃……一种普遍的唤起语。“我们觉得呢，chat？” 你知道，这某种程度上反映了直播文化的兴起，我看到很多词都来自Twitch空间，比如“rizz”流行的时候，它就来自Twitch。）
Oh okay so when I'm referred to as chat it's from like a liveest streamer typically saying like hey don't forget to subscribe. Yeah it's addressing an unknown audience you know that there is an audience, you don't know who's in the audience. Chat is a catchall, there's a sort of collective unity to it. And then there's also a sort of yeah the strange dynamic of digital surveillance where we really don't know who's going to see a message where it can be distributed even on the surface level. So right now this will go somewhere but then what if it goes. Viral and then that will then go in directions. You don't know. That's also what six, seven was parroting at the core of it because it comes from this joke that you could go viral by saying six, seven, so people said six, seven to go viral. It was a little self referential is a nod to itself. And then yeah, drifts from NBA players who are saying this to go viral to Gen Alpha kids were saying this to go viral and then it goes off camera. And now the implied joke is still this possibility that a camera is watching you. And I think that's maybe a defining trend that I keep seeing that we're kind of aware of this constant surveillance or panopticon and we're ironically performing for the algorithm when we say670 the early iteration of the joke now and of course it just is layered into abstraction.
（哦，好吧，所以当我被称为“chat”时，是来自像直播主通常会说“嘿，别忘了订阅”。是的，这是在称呼一个未知的观众，你知道有观众存在，但不知道观众是谁。“Chat”是个统称，有种集体的统一性。然后，还有那种，是的，数字监控的奇怪动态，我们真的不知道谁会看到一条信息，即使在表面上它会被分发。所以，现在这会传到某个地方，但如果它……走红了，那就会朝着你无法预料的方向发展。这也是“六七”这个梗的核心所在，因为它源于一个笑话：说“六七”就能走红，所以人们说“六七”是为了走红。它有点自我指涉，是对自身的一种致敬。然后，是的，从NBA球员为了走红说这个，到Alpha世代的孩子们为了走红说这个，然后它就离开了镜头。而现在，隐含的笑话仍然是摄像头可能在看着你的这种可能性。我认为这可能是我一直看到的一个决定性趋势：我们某种程度上意识到了这种持续的监视或“全景监狱”，而当我们在说“670”（这是这个笑话的早期版本）时，我们讽刺性地在为算法表演，当然，现在它已经层层抽象化了。）
---
Yeah, I mean there's the panopticon element of it. But it also strikes me as fascinating that so many young people today, when you ask them what they want to be when they grow up, is a youtuber right or to go viral or to be an influencer so now our life aspirations aren't a particular virtue. But instead, yeah, to be seen I think's like right.50% or something. It's not just astronaut anymore, right? We we want to be seen and there's more seeing going on. I kind of worry about the amount of seeing that we're doing. I was in Washington square park a few months back and I saw somebody with like the meta glasses trying to like make riz content and he was like talking up girls. But like it's not a real alteration. He's performing. He's ah, he's clip farming. You know I see like politicians saying stuff that they know will algorithmically go viral later. But in the present moment they sacrifice like a moment of decorum. I I, you know, I do worry about what is the notion that we could all be perceived due to us. So on one end you could act out more because you want to be perceived on the other end. It makes you more docile because you're worried about being perceived. They're bad effects for society in both ways. And so we can use words like six, seven or chat to point to what's happening in culture and then from there we get into subjective territory, right? But I do want to say that the words that people are using are merely a way to. Categorize reality and in that sense, they are just a tool. A tool can be used for good or bad. You can draw your own conclusions about culture in your talk.
（是的，我指的是其中的“全景监狱”元素。但也让我觉得着迷的是，如今这么多年轻人，当你问他们长大后想做什么，是当个YouTuber，或者走红，或者当个网红，所以现在我们的人生志向不是某种特定的美德了。而是，是的，我认为是“被看见”，大概50%或类似。不再是宇航员了，对吧？我们想要被看见，而且正在发生越来越多的“看见”。我有点担心我们正在做的这种“看见”的数量。几个月前我在华盛顿广场公园，看到一个人戴着Meta眼镜，试图制作“rizz”内容，他在搭讪女孩。但这并不是真实的互动。他在表演。他在，嗯，他在“片段耕作”。你知道，我看到政客们说一些他们知道之后会在算法上走红的话。但在当下那一刻，他们牺牲了某种程度的体面。我，你知道，我确实担心“我们所有人都可能被感知”这种观念。所以一方面，你可能因为想被感知而更出格；另一方面，它让你更温顺，因为你担心被感知。这两种方式对社会都有不良影响。所以我们可以用像“六七”或“chat”这样的词来指出文化中正在发生的事情，然后从那里我们进入主观领域，对吧？但我想说的是，人们使用的词语仅仅是一种……分类现实的方式，在这个意义上，它们只是一种工具。工具可以用于好事或坏事。你可以从你的演讲中得出关于文化的自己的结论。）
---
You focus on how llm large language models and chatbot ais are affecting speech affecting the way we talk. How do you think it's going to change our language practices in the future?
（你关注于大型语言模型和聊天机器人AI如何影响言语，影响我们说话的方式。你认为未来这将如何改变我们的语言实践？）
Yeah, um, mostly stuff is happening ambiently right now. So first we observed an increase in the word delve because chat gpt over representsresents the word delve and you know maybe you heard of that. Maybe you heard that chat tpt says the word delve. Maybe you heard about like sentence structures, like it's not just X, it's y and you're trying to avoid that. It's still going to affect you.
（是的，嗯，目前大部分事情是潜移默化地发生的。首先，我们观察到“delve”这个词的使用增加了，因为ChatGPT过度表征了“delve”这个词，你也许听说过。也许你听说过ChatGPT说“delve”这个词。也许你听说过像“不仅仅是X，而是Y”这样的句子结构，并且你在试图避免它。但它仍然会影响你。）
There's so many other words that it's uses at a slightly higher rate like surpass or boast or garner. I don't know. I call myself saying garner, I don't know why I'm saying, but you see a word being used around you and you use it more. That's how we adopt language and chatib BT and these other llms represent language as like a series of numerical kind of coordinates. And these representation are close perhaps to how we actually feel about words but they homogenize it and they get a little bit wrong because representation can never be reality. So they mess things up and now we have new studies coming out showing that people, yes, in spontaneous spoken conversations we're using the word surpass and boast more. Because we see it more, we absorb it. That's how I think AI, ISS, bering to be affecting our language.
（还有很多其他词，它的使用频率略高，比如“surpass”、“boast”或“garner”。我不知道。我发现自己会说“garner”，不知道为什么，但当你看到一个词在你周围被使用时，你也会更多地使用它。我们就是这样习得语言的，而ChatGPT和其他大型语言模型将语言表征为一系列类似数字的坐标。这些表征可能接近于我们对词语的真实感受，但它们将其同质化，并且会有些偏差，因为表征永远不可能是现实。所以它们把事情搞乱了。现在有新的研究表明，人们，是的，在自发的口语对话中，我们更多地使用“surpass”和“boast”。因为我们看到得更多，我们就吸收了。这就是我认为AI正在影响我们语言的方式。）
I'm more, I think conscious of algorithms, ideas, really travel. You can visualize it like a virus infecting a population. It starts with a host, it goes to some early nodes in the network of social contagion and then it diffuses further. Algorithms represent those social networks. They do literally accelerate ideas. So if we want to think about how chat gpt is influencing language, you don't even have to be using AI to be affected by these words because they're showing up all around us.
（我更多地，我认为有意识地认识到，想法确实在传播。你可以把它想象成病毒感染人群。它始于一个宿主，传播到社交传染网络中的一些早期节点，然后进一步扩散。算法代表了那些社交网络。它们确实加速了想法的传播。所以，如果我们想思考ChatGPT如何影响语言，你甚至不需要使用AI就会受到这些词的影响，因为它们在我们周围随处可见。）
I'm thinking about, oh, now we might be looking at more content on social media using the word delve or something.14% of all research papers are now written with AI. We have like parliamentary speeches being written. With AI, you're going to see it more no matter how immune you think you are, and then you're going to start saying it more. Yeah, it's this loop, right? It's this unending fun house mirror or feedback loop of our language. We feed it, it feeds us back to us from like an aggregated. Set right. So what are we losing?
（我在想，哦，现在我们可能会在社交媒体上看到更多使用“delve”之类词的内容。14%的研究论文现在是用AI写的。我们有像议会演讲这样的东西被AI撰写。无论你认为自己多么免疫，你会更多地看到它，然后你就会开始更多地使用它。是的，就是这个循环，对吧？就像一个无尽的语言哈哈镜或反馈循环。我们喂养它，它从一个聚合的集合中回馈给我们。那么，我们正在失去什么？）
---
Yeah, if our language practices are sort of undifferentiated, we're losing the individual quirks or flair that can be in language or slang or intricacies of dialects. Are we losing connection to each other? Are we losing connection to a certain culture? What's the cost of this?
（是的，如果我们的语言实践变得没有区别，我们正在失去语言、俚语或方言复杂性中可能存在的个人怪癖或特色。我们正在失去彼此之间的联系吗？我们正在失去与某种文化的联系吗？代价是什么？）
Yeah, with language. Again, this is a way to reflect our reality and a reality is not purely this algorithmic AI reality. You will have a different dialect, always with your close friends, with your family, you will speak. You will code switch between your regional dialect and then this homogenized AI dialect, whatever that we're all talking in, but yeah, you'll, you'll always find different ways to communicate. Given the context.
（是的，关于语言。再说一次，这是一种反映我们现实的方式，而现实不仅仅是这种算法化的AI现实。你总会拥有不同的方言，总是和你的密友、你的家人，你会说。你会在你的地方方言和这种同质化的AI方言之间进行语码转换，无论我们都在讲哪种，但是的，你总能找到不同的交流方式，这取决于语境。）
It's not a categorical homogenization of language, but in the domain of public speech I think we are kind of traveling towards a norm. There's also a really good book that Kyle Jacob called filter world about how algorithms sort of dilute culture down. I think that's very happening. And so that will be happening with language.
（这不是语言绝对的均质化，但在公共话语领域，我认为我们正朝着一种规范迈进。还有一本很好的书，Kyle Jacob写的《Filter World》，讲算法如何稀释文化。我认为这正在发生。所以语言也会发生这种情况。）
We have a language dying out every two weeks, there's only seven zero in the world every two weeks when it goes and this was happening before. I think the Internet perhaps accelerated it, but globalization already kickstarted it by nationalizing and centralizing our languages. We were on this path since like the18 fifties, but it's, it's definitely happening even more with with algorithms which are more of this force for homogeneity because there's an expectation that users have of like oh I watch you to be speaking in American English or in British English or whatever. So that's like one effect that's certainly happening.
（每两周就有一种语言消亡，全世界每两周就有七种语言消失，这在以前就在发生。我认为互联网或许加速了它，但全球化已经通过语言的国有化和集中化开启了这一进程。我们从19世纪50年代起就走上了这条路，但现在随着算法的发展，这种情况肯定更加严重，因为算法是更强大的同质化力量，因为用户期望你讲美式英语或英式英语之类的。所以这肯定是一个正在发生的影响。）
I do not think it's going to be happening in every sphere of your life but it's, it's going to be influencing you and that's really sad because with some of these dying languages are such incredible perspectives for looking at the world. There are like these different frames. I was just reading this this book braiding sweetgrass. I highly recommend there's this pot with tommy word to be a saturday. So like we don't have the verb idea of being a sad, but I really like that. That is a frame you can look at saturdays through. Languages have different understandings of time and direction. And the more you condense down into this like sort of western centric view we got going on, you lose the color and the beauty of all these different ways we could look at the world, yeah. And sort of the richness and the diversity and the dynamism of being human, right?
（我不认为它会发生在你生活的每个领域，但它将会影响你，这真的很可悲，因为一些濒危语言承载着看待世界的绝妙视角。有这些不同的框架。我刚刚在读《Braiding Sweetgrass》这本书。我强烈推荐，书中有一个词“to be a Saturday”。所以我们没有“to be a sad”这个动词概念，但我真的很喜欢。那是一个你可以透过它来看待星期六的框架。语言对时间和方向有不同的理解。而你越是压缩到我们现在这种以西方为中心的视角，你就失去了我们看待世界的所有这些不同方式所带来的色彩和美丽，是的。还有作为人类的丰富性、多样性和活力，对吧？）
---
So I guess my next question is what do we do now? You know, you in your talk, you say that we are subconsciously now confusing the AI version of language with actual language. And then that means, as we've been talking about, the real thing is getting closer to the machine version of the thing. What do we do about this? It seems like we have a collective action problem.
（所以我想我的下一个问题是：我们现在该怎么办？你知道，你在演讲中说，我们正在潜意识中将AI版本的语言与实际语言混淆。然后这意味着，正如我们一直在讨论的，真实的东西正越来越接近机器的版本。我们对此该怎么办？这似乎是一个集体行动的问题。）
You can't avoid it. It's you simply cannot avoid it. Now I do think by being conscious about this, the more aware we are of what these platforms are doing to us, the more resistance we have. This is a virus. You are able to form your own kind of antibodies through media literacy and it goes so much beyond language.
（你无法避免。你根本无法避免。现在我认为，通过对这个问题有意识，我们越了解这些*台在对我们做什么，我们就越有抵抗力。这是一种病毒。你能够通过媒体素养形成你自己的抗体，而这远远超出了语言的范围。）
I think language is the canary in the coal mine, that sort of proxy for greater cultural shifts that we can pay attention to because it tells us what's going on in society in that telling truth kind of way. But I'm worried about political shifts. I'm worried about social shifts. Chachi pt has different political leanings in each language because it represents the values of those countries differently. That's really concerning to me that there's a direction that we are being trained to think when you interact with a platform like X, you got to know that Elon Musk is artificially amplifying his tweets so he could go more viral.
（我认为语言是煤矿里的金丝雀，是我们可以关注的更大文化转变的某种代表，因为它以一种揭示真相的方式告诉我们社会正在发生什么。但我担心政治转变。我担心社会转变。ChatGPT每种语言都有不同的政治倾向，因为它以不同的方式代表那些国家的价值观。这真的让我担忧，我们正在被训练朝着某个方向思考，当你与像X这样的*台互动时，你必须知道Elon Musk在人为地放大他的推文，以便他能更走红。）
When you interact with the chatbot like grok, we also know that Elon Musk changes what the chatbot says so that we align with his picture of reality, right? We, we need to know that so that we could maintain our reality.
（当你与像Grok这样的聊天机器人互动时，我们也知道Elon Musk会改变聊天机器人说的话，以便我们与他对现实的看法保持一致，对吧？我们需要知道这一点，以便我们能保持自己的现实。）
---
Who do you think is responsible for not only continuing to have these conversations, but helping make sure that the next generations coming up are media literate and hip to what's happening here?
（你认为谁有责任不仅继续推动这些对话，还要帮助确保下一代具备媒体素养并了解这里发生的事情？）
Yeah, and I also want to caveat. I do not think the responsibility should merely be on the consumer of media. I'm simply pushing that right now because I think that's the best thing we can do in this current cultural moment where it doesn't seem like we have any power against the platforms. The moment when we can start regulating these platforms seriously, we should be doing that. But in the meantime, in our personal lives, the way that I have been navigating social media is trying to build that radical media literacy for myself.
（是的，我也想提醒一下。我不认为责任只应该在媒体消费者身上。我现在只是强调这一点，因为我认为在当前这个文化时刻，这似乎是我们能做的最好的事情，我们似乎没有能力对抗这些*台。当我们能够开始认真监管这些*台时，我们就应该这样做。但与此同时，在我们的个人生活中，我一直在社交媒体上导航的方式是努力为自己建立那种彻底的媒体素养。）
It's my dream that one day in10 th grade ELA class, along with poetry scantion, you have a unit for how to look at tikt tock. And I know that sounds ridiculous, but it's not a joke. In the same way you should think about the news you should think about. The new York times is not printing some stories because they're filtered through layers of manufactured consent. We should teach our kids about engagement optimization algorithms and how these are working to trigger your reptile brain impulses and they're not actually aligned with what you want. So all of these things I think should be taught.
（我的梦想是，有一天在十年级的英语语言艺术课上，除了诗歌扫描，还会有一个单元教你如何看待TikTok。我知道这听起来很荒谬，但这并非玩笑。就像你应该思考新闻一样，你应该思考。《纽约时报》不刊登某些报道，因为它们经过了多层“制造共识”的过滤。我们应该教我们的孩子关于参与度优化算法的知识，以及这些算法如何触发你的爬虫脑冲动，而它们实际上并不符合你的真实愿望。所以我认为所有这些都应该被教授。）
---
This is actually why I haven't joined the whole wait until eighth on. Phones you know how there's this big campaign to keep kids off of screens? I actually worry that it's making them completely illiterate until they just jump in and you know, rap jump into the deep end. I would say it's pretty bad to go from zero to100 like that but it's that's such a delicate question. Like clearly it is bad for children to be looking at ipads at age two, I would also really have to navigate that when I become as a parent. Sure, yeah, it's a scary question to be grappling with but I think like slowly integrating while teaching them lessons about this thing that's being shown. Oh that's an AI generated video that is not what things really look like or a lesson that I would always want to teach my kid is like why did this show up on your for you page right? When you get a video ask yourself that question right. Think about what videos are not showing up because there's always a survivorship bias to what's filtered. The thing that's showing up is generating engagement. It's past content guidelines for the platform. It's targeted to the platform's idea of who you are, which is an incorrect idea in the same way that. The word delve is incorrectly represented and then along with that, strategies for how to remain present and mindful and literate. So I, yeah, I think the thing we least like about scrolling is that it makes us feel like we just wasted a bunch of time. I've personally sort of found ways to extract meaning and presence from being on social media, but it takes like turning off the positive frames that they're trying to trick you into, and that's part of it as well.
（这实际上是我没有加入“等到八年级”运动的原因。你知道现在有场大规模运动让孩子们远离屏幕吗？我实际上担心这会使他们对媒体完全一无所知，直到他们直接跳进去，你知道，一下子跳进深水区。我得说从零到一百这样很糟糕，但这是个非常微妙的问题。显然，两岁的孩子看iPad是不好的，如果我成为父母，也必须认真处理这个问题。当然，是的，这是个令人担忧的问题，但我想，应该慢慢地让他们接触，同时教导他们关于所展示内容的道理。比如，“哦，那是个AI生成的视频，不是真实的样子”，或者我一直想教孩子的一课是：“为什么这个视频会出现在你的‘为你推荐’页面？当你看到一个视频时，问问自己这个问题。想想哪些视频没有出现，因为过滤掉的内容总是存在幸存者偏差。出现的内容正在产生互动。它通过了*台的内容准则。它是针对*台对你的认知（一种错误的认知）进行推送的，就像‘delve’这个词被错误地表征一样。”然后，再配合上如何保持专注、保持觉知和保持素养的策略。所以，我，是的，我认为我们最不喜欢刷社交媒体的地方是，它让我们觉得浪费了一大堆时间。我个人找到了一些方法，从使用社交媒体中提取意义和存在感，但这需要关掉它们试图诱骗你进入的积极框架，这也是其中的一部分。）
---
OK, Adam, Alexa, we could talk about all this stuff with you for so much longer, but this is an excellent extrapolation and building upon your talk, okay, stick with us. I'm going to hit you with a few rapid fire general questions unrelated to your talk specifically, but you can tie it back if you want. All right? Let's go. What does a good idea look like to you?
（好的，Adam Aleksic，我们可以和你聊这些话题很久，但这是对你演讲极好的延伸和补充。好的，请继续收听。我要问你几个快速的一般性问题，不一定与你的演讲具体相关，但如果你想，可以联系回来。好吗？开始。对你来说，一个好点子是什么样的？）
Something that is weird and different from what other people have done and you have to draw on something that exists already, I suppose, but remix it in a new way. Yeah, collisions of ideas that have been previously out there, right? Drawing the connection between the data points, that doesn't exist yet. Yeah, yeah, I like kind of mixing and remixing for creativity.
（某种奇怪的、与他人所做不同的事情，而且你必须基于已经存在的东西，我想，但要用一种新的方式重新混合。是的，将以前就有的想法碰撞在一起，对吧？在数据点之间建立尚不存在的联系。是的，是的，我喜欢为了创造力而进行混合与再混合。）
---
All right? What is a new year's? Resolution or intention or a ritual of yours if you haven't okay ritual. I do have a ritual so it's become a yearly tradition that my birthday is on january third and the moby dick Marathon in new bedford, Massachusetts is also on january third. So I'm going with a bunch of friends to to read moby dick for25 hours.
（好的。新年决心？或者意向，或者你的一个仪式，如果你有的话…好的，仪式。我确实有一个仪式，已经变成了每年的传统：我的生日是1月3日，马萨诸塞州新贝德福德的《白鲸记》马拉松朗读也在1月3日。所以我会和一群朋友一起去，朗读《白鲸记》25个小时。）
What you everybody just gets together and sits and reads? It's terrible, it's wonderful. Yeah, it's, it's a really painful experience but I think it's the only way you can read moby dick and I you kind of go mad along with captain ahab so you were quietly reading in a crowd or are you reading a loud popcorn style? No, no, it's like there's there's one person chosen to read and it goes for25 hours. So I have like a130 am reading slot. My friend John has a530 am reading slot. Yeah, this is the second year we're definitely making this a yearly thing.
（你们大家就聚在一起坐着读吗？很糟糕，也很美妙。是的，那是一次非常痛苦的经历，但我认为那是阅读《白鲸记》的唯一方式，而且你会和Ahab船长一起有点发疯。那么你们是安静地在人群中阅读，还是像爆米花式轮流大声读？不，不是，是选出一个人来读，持续25个小时。所以我有凌晨1:30的朗读时段。我的朋友John有早上5:30的朗读时段。是的，这是第二年，我们肯定要把这做成年度活动。）
Do you know you're reading like which part of the book you're going to be at or everybody's going to collectively be at at your130 a m reading slot? I'm really hoping for the chapter stubb kills a whale. Yes, that's such a good one but I yeah so I don't know. We'll see we'll see.
（你知道你会读到书中的哪个部分吗？还是在凌晨1:30你的时段，大家会集体读到某个地方？我真的很希望能读到“Stubb杀死一头鲸鱼”那一章。是的，那是很棒的一章，但我……是的，所以我也不知道。我们拭目以待吧。）
---
Okay, that's so funny. All right what is a hobby or interest of yours unrelated to your work that you love so much that you might be able to give a ted talk about it? I don't believe in hobbies. I think hobbies are strange. I think like hobbbby is defined as this thing which is like slightly less serious than work but more serious than your other leisure activities. And I want to treat everything in my life with the equal importance of work and leisure. I like sitting, I like eating, I like listening to music but that sounds boring now that now I sound boring. I do. I do have like activities I do for fun but I'm anti calling things hobby. I like that.
（好的，太有趣了。好吧，你有哪些与工作无关的爱好或兴趣，你非常喜欢以至于可能就此做一场TED演讲？我不相信“爱好”。我认为爱好很奇怪。“爱好”被定义成这种东西：比工作稍微不那么严肃，但比你其他休闲活动更严肃。我想把我生活中的一切都视为与工作和休闲同等重要。我喜欢坐着，喜欢吃，喜欢听音乐，但这听起来很无聊，现在听起来我很无聊。是的。我确实有为了乐趣而做的事，但我反对把东西称为“爱好”。我喜欢这个观点。）
---
All right, that might be a hill you're willing to die on. Because my next question is what is an ant hill you'd be willing to die on? For example, I would die on the hill that you know, one location's Pizza is better than another locations's Pizza. Do you have anything that you feel? Yeah, like I hate the word content and I know as a linguist I'm not supposed to hate words. This is from my cultural critic perspective. I think it's so strange that we talk about making content because the word implies something that is contained like the contents of a box or drawer.
（好吧，这可能是你愿意坚守的观点。因为我下一个问题是：你愿意死守的一个观点是什么？例如，我愿意死守的观点是，某个地方的披萨比另一个地方的披萨好。你有什么观点吗？有的，比如我讨厌“内容”这个词，我知道作为语言学家不应该讨厌词语。这是从我文化评论者的角度出发的。我认为我们谈论“制作内容”很奇怪，因为这个词意味着被包含的东西，就像盒子或抽屉里的物品一样。）
And now ask yourself like where ISS it being contained? It's being contained in the the medium of social media. So tick tock is like the box and then your content is this thing held in the box and that implies first of all that it's interchangeable with other pieces of content and that you know the content doesn't have anything special within it.
（现在问问自己，它被包含在哪里？它被包含在社交媒体这个媒介里。所以TikTok就像盒子，而你的“内容”就是盒子里装着的东西。这首先意味着它与其他“内容”碎片是可互换的，而且你知道“内容”本身并没有什么特别之处。）
Another reframe potentially is that your video is the container and your ID or message is the content. But we don't talk about on that level. We abstracted a level up and then it becomes this like commodifiable thing where you can talk about, oh, this is how you make better content, this is how you make content every day. And then you're like you lose the plot of what you're trying to do, which is spread good ideas. And spreading ideas critically also means your idea leaves the platform and with content it's contained. So it's very strange. I try to avoid calling myself a content creator and perhaps trying to reclaim the word influencer because I know that's like a little negatively coded. But that's what I'm trying to do. I want to influence people like it's, it's like it'd be Dis accurateate to not say that, okay. All right, linguist influencer, author etymologist but certainly not merely a creator of content. Adam alexic, thank you so much for sitting down with us. Thank you.
（另一个可能的重新表述是：你的视频是容器，而你的想法或信息是“内容”。但我们不在那个层面上讨论。我们向上抽象了一层，然后它就变成了这种可商品化的东西，你可以谈论“哦，这是制作更好内容的方法，这是每天制作内容的方法。”然后你就失去了你原本试图做的事情的核心，即传播好想法。批判性地传播想法也意味着你的想法会离开*台，而“内容”是被包含的。所以这很奇怪。我尽量避免称自己为“内容创作者”，或许试图重新定义“影响者”这个词，因为我知道它有点负面含义。但那就是我正在努力做的。我想影响人们，就好像……不说这个会不准确。好的。那么，语言学家、影响者、作家、词源学家，但绝对不是仅仅一个“内容创作者”。Adam Aleksic，非常感谢你与我们交谈。谢谢。）
---
That was Adam Alexa speaking at tedx twenty twenty five and in conversation with yours truly, elise h.
（以上是Adam Aleksic在2025年TEDx大会上的演讲，以及与我的对话，我是Elise H。）
