AI-Associated Lexical Shifts Across 34 Languages: Cross-Lingual Convergence and Diachronic Uptake in News Writing
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
AI-associated lexical shifts have been documented mainly in Scientific English. We extend this work to 34 languages in the WMT News Crawl corpus, refining a split-halves continuation diagnostic that compares GPT-4.1 continuations with matched human gold-standard text. For each language, we derive ranked AI-overused lemmas using log prevalence ratios. We find substantial cross-lingual semantic convergence: semantically related concepts recur across typologically diverse languages, with 'emphasize'-type verbs appearing in 24 of 34 languages. Embedding-based and manual analyses support this pattern. We also examine diachronic uptake in news writing before and after ChatGPT's release. Tracking each language's top 20 AI-overused items, we find prevalence increases in 26 of 34 languages from 2020-2021 to 2023-2024, with a mean change of +15.1%, whilst matched baseline words show no comparable increase (-4.5%). In 10 languages with longer historical coverage, longitudinal analyses show post-2022 increases that exceed the modest shifts observed in earlier periods, though with smaller effect sizes than in Scientific English. We validate our approach extensively, including across seeds, model variants, data sizes, model families, and more. Our findings are consistent with the view that AI-associated lexical preferences extend beyond English and may exert cross-lingual homogenising pressure on global language use.
Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 58 of its 119 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 25 May 2026.
Builds on
58 of 119 references.
References · 58
- 2017Attention Is All You Needcited by 59,932
- 2022Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackcited by 15,712
- 2023Direct Preference Optimization: Your Language Model is Secretly a Reward Modelcited by 7,916
- 2021On the Opportunities and Risks of Foundation Modelscited by 3,961
- 2017Deep reinforcement learning from human preferencescited by 3,846
- 2020Learning to summarize from human feedbackcited by 2,562
- 2023Whose Opinions Do Language Models Reflect?cited by 759
- 2020Stanza: A Python Natural Language Processing Toolkit for Many Human Languagescited by 719
- 2023DetectGPT: Zero-Shot Machine-Generated Text Detection using Probability Curvaturecited by 705
- 2020Making Monolingual Sentence Embeddings Multilingual using Knowledge Distillationcited by 591
- 2019GLTR: Statistical Detection and Visualization of Generated Textcited by 490
- 2023Towards Measuring the Representation of Subjective Global Opinions in Language Modelscited by 424
38 more
- 2023Understanding the Effects of RLHF on LLM Generalisation and Diversitycited by 386
- 2023Can AI-Generated Text be Reliably Detected?cited by 372
- 2023The Curse of Recursion: Training on Generated Data Makes Models Forgetcited by 343
- 2020Universal Dependencies v2: An Evergrowing Multilingual Treebank Collectioncited by 269
- 2016Diachronic Word Embeddings Reveal Statistical Laws of Semantic Changecited by 219
- 2023Does Writing with Language Models Reduce Content Diversity?cited by 190
- 2023GPT detectors are biased against non-native English writerscited by 175
- 2023Generative artificial intelligence enhances creativity but reduces the diversity of novel contentcited by 165
- 2023MAGE: Machine-generated Text Detection in the Wildcited by 130
- 2024Homogenization Effects of Large Language Models on Human Creative Ideationcited by 127
- 2024A Note on Shumailov et al. (2024): `AI Models Collapse When Trained on Recursively Generated Data'cited by 114
- 2020SemEval-2020 Task 1: Unsupervised Lexical Semantic Change Detectioncited by 105
- 2022Human heuristics for AI-generated language are flawedcited by 104
- 2025Verbalized Sampling: How to Mitigate Mode Collapse and Unlock LLM Diversitycited by 100
- 2023Testing of Detection Tools for AI-Generated Textcited by 86
- 2019Comparison of Diverse Decoding Methods from Conditional Language Modelscited by 78
- 2024Delving into LLM-assisted writing in biomedical publications through excess vocabularycited by 75
- 2024On the Algorithmic Bias of Aligning Large Language Models with RLHF: Preference Collapse and Matching Regularizationcited by 72
- 2018Survey of Computational Approaches to Lexical Semantic Changecited by 60
- 2024AI Suggestions Homogenize Writing Toward Western Styles and Diminish Cultural Nuancescited by 59
- 2024One fish, two fish, but not the whole sea: Alignment reduces language models' conceptual diversitycited by 57
- 2023What Comes Next? Evaluating Uncertainty in Neural Text Generators Against Human Production Variabilitycited by 51
- 2025The Widespread Adoption of Large Language Model-Assisted Writing Across Societycited by 50
- 2024From Lists to Emojis: How Format Bias Affects Model Alignmentcited by 48
- 2024Human Creativity in the Age of LLMs: Randomized Experiments on Divergent and Convergent Thinkingcited by 43
- 2025We're Different, We're the Same: Creative Homogeneity Across LLMscited by 41
- 2023Machine-Made Media: Monitoring the Mobilization of Machine-Generated Articles on Misinformation and Mainstream News Websitescited by 37
- 2024Are We in the AI-Generated Text World Already? Quantifying and Monitoring AIGT on Social Mediacited by 35
- 2024Empirical evidence of Large Language Model's influence on human spoken communicationcited by 27
- 2024Whose Emotions and Moral Sentiments Do Language Models Reflect?cited by 20
- 2023Distinguishing ChatGPT(-3.5, -4)-generated and human-written papers through Japanese stylometric analysiscited by 16
- 2024The Role of AI in Peer Support for Young People: A Study of Preferences for Human- and AI-Generated Responsescited by 15
- 2024Towards the relationship between AIGC in manuscript writing and author profiles: evidence from preprints in LLMscited by 14
- 2025Flattery, Fluff, and Fog: Diagnosing and Mitigating Idiosyncratic Biases in Preference Modelscited by 13
- 2024AI "News" Content Farms Are Easy to Make and Hard to Detect: A Case Study in Italiancited by 12
- 2025Academic journals' AI policies fail to curb the surge in AI-assisted academic writingcited by 12
- 2025Comparing LLM-generated and human-authored news text using formal syntactic theorycited by 11
- 2025How much are LLMs changing the language of academic papers after ChatGPT? A multi-database and full text analysiscited by 8
50 most cited of 58 All 58 (JSON)
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 2.
2 papers.