When you’re enamoured of a technology and someone points out important ethical challenges, a typical reflex is to seek permission: yeah, but what about this use? If you find yourself seeking permission, one useful thing to do is to step back and inspect the underlying value conflict. What does your own moral compass say? Centering values leads to mindful choices. As you move from a tech-first to a values-first perspective, the question shifts from “won’t you give me permission?” to “how do I do the best science possible?”. And that, to me, is a question worth asking.
Some thoughts on generative AI, reproducibility, and why the praxis of slow and reproducible science provides a useful lesson for navigating the lures of “AI”.
Succinct argument for scientific publishers to adopt a clear and unequivocal policy that discourages authors from submitting synthetically generated text, and that invites them to uphold basic standards and core values of research integrity.
Jobs! If you are interested in fundamental research at the intersection of language, interaction and technology, have a look at the PhD and postdoc positions we are advertising. We look forward to growing the Futures of Language team.
TL;DR for English readers: Dutch labour unions representing university workers negotiated with UNL, representing universities’ top management levels. The latter…
For Kurzweil, singularity is the point at which machine intelligence would be more powerful than human intelligence. I’m coming to think it may be near just by the sheer amount of mindnumbing bullshit we are forced to contend with, which is making us all more stupid.
Start your blog with an exultant tone, pompous words, and gratuitous alliterations and I know we’re in for a rapid descent into the wastelands of utter mediocrity. I recently came across some obvious LLM-generated slop on science blogging aggregator Rogue Scholar. Here I write up why synthetic text has no place in scholarly blogging.
Oxford University Press is going full surveillance capitalist mode. They don’t do author offprints anymore because authors sharing their work equals “piracy”; want nothing more dearly than tracking their users’ every move; and would rather you didn’t even email your work to students and colleagues. God forbid anyone actually read your publicly funded scholarly work.
Van eind 2018 tot halverwege 2024 had ik het voorrecht om onderzoeksleider te zijn van het Vidi-project “Elementaire deeltjes van de taal” met een Vidi-talentbeurs van NWO, de Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek. Dit zijn enkele notities uit de eindrapportage.
New paper! McLean & Dingemanse 2025, A multi-methods toolkit for documentary research on ideophones. In which we review a diversity of methods and analytical approaches to the documentation of ideophones.
GPT based text generators like ChatGPT or Microsoft Copilot have rapidly become a “cultural sensation”. Here I provide scientific background and guidance on how to think critically and mindfully about these tools in academic writing and research.
I saw a thing fly by on PsyArxiv and could not ignore it so I’m doing a drive-by peer-review. It claims that English-based AI-generated norms are “of particular value for under-resourced languages”. Is that pesky linguistic diversity bothering you? Here, try on these rosy English-tinted glasses and everything will look all prim and proper, promise. Warning: snark detected.
It takes two to tell a story: narrator and audience. Response tokens or continuers like ‘mhmm’ play a key role in making stories work. Two new papers extend the study of continuers across languages and modalities. Work by Lutzenberger et al. reveals the importance of minimal tokens that don’t occupy the main articulators in British Sign Language and Spoken British English. And a study by Börstell showcases a neat methodological replication and extension of the sequential search method, applied to Swedish Sign Language corpus data, with promises of broader applicability.
Academics often feature a few selected papers on their home page. Typically these represent big projects or work published in prominent venues. What I’d like to see more of is “niche papers”: work to be proud of even if it has managed to remain a bit obscure. What are your niche papers?