AI-Linguistics: A New Method or a New Paradigm? LLM-Based-, LLM-Driven- and LLM-Native-Linguistics
Authors
Daniel SłapekKey Information
Journal
Published in Vol. 6 No. 1 (2026) of AI-Linguistica. Linguistic Studies on AI-Generated Texts and Discourses.
AI-Linguistica. Linguistic Studies on AI-Generated Texts and Discourses is a new scholarly journal aiming at providing a publishing plateform for researchers from all areas of Linguistics (interfacing with neighboring fields: Communication Science, Media and Journalism Studies, Computational Linguistics) to reflect on generated texts from a variety of perspectives: theoretical, descriptive, and applied.
We understand ‘generated texts’ in a broad sense, including formats as diverse as texts generated by Large Language Models, AI-powered smart agents (i.e. chatbots, voice assistants, social bots etc.), writing assistance tools, template-based software, and neural machine translation services.
About the JournalAbstract
In this paper, I deal with the growing role of Large Language Models (LLMs) in linguistic research, asking if their use represents just a methodological innovation or a broader paradigmatic change. Drawing on the distinction between corpus-based and corpus-driven linguistics, I propose three approaches to AI-assisted language research: LLM-based, LLM-driven, and LLM-native linguistics. In LLM-based research, models serve as tools for analyzing linguistic data within previously defined questions and hypotheses. In LLM-driven research, patterns identified by the model provide the basis for formulating new research questions and hypotheses. Both approaches constitute methodological innovations, since the object of inquiry remains human language. LLM-native linguistics, by contrast, treats LLM-generated texts and the models themselves as autonomous objects of linguistic investigation. This approach raises important questions about the status of AI-generated texts and the boundaries of linguistic inquiry. I believe that LLM-native linguistics may change what linguistics recognizes as its object of study.
References
Biber, Douglas. 2009. Corpus-based and corpus-driven analyses of language var-iation and use. In Heine, Bernd & Narrog, Heiko (eds), The Oxford Hand-book of Linguistic Analysis, 159–192. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199544004.013.0008
Bobrowski, Ireneusz. 2015. Problems of Methodology and Philosophy in Linguis-tics. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang Edition.
Bouterse, Jeroen & Karstens, Bart. 2015. A diversity of divisions: Tracing the history of the demarcation between the sciences and the humanities. Isis. A Journal of the History of Science Society 106(2). 341–352. https://doi.org/10.1086/681995
Brown, Tom B. & Mann, Benjamin & Ryder, Nick & Subbiah, Melanie & Kaplan, Jared & Dhariwal, Prafulla & Neelakantan, Arvind & Shyam, Pra-nav & Sastry, Girish & Askell, Amanda et al. 2020. Language models are few-shot learners. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 33. 1877–1901. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2005.14165
Catasso, Nicholas. 2026. Benchmarking AI acceptability and grammaticality in German: A Study of ChatGPT and Human Judgments. AI-Linguistica 3(1). https://doi.org/10.62408/ai-ling.v3i1.35
De Cesare, Anna-Maria. 2023. Assessing the quality of ChatGPT’s generated output in light of human-written texts. A corpus study based on textual pa-rameters. CHIMERA. Romance Corpora and Linguistic studies 10. 179–210.
De Cesare, Anna-Maria. 2025. LLM referential chain generation. A qualitative case study based on Italian biographies produced by GPT-4. Linguistik Onli-ne 136(4). 25–52. https://doi.org/10.13092/8tppdv47
De Cesare, Anna-Maria. 2026. L’italiano sintetico dell’intelligenza artificiale generativa. Firenze: Cesati.
Drackert, Anastasia & Horbach, Andrea & Peters, Anja. 2025. How good are LLMs in generating input texts for reading tasks in German as a foreign lan-guage? Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 45. 222–252. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190525000066
Garassino, Davide & Masia, Viviana & Brocca, Nicola & Delorme Benites, Al-ice. 2024. Politicians vs ChatGPT: A study of presuppositions in French and Italian political communication. AI-Linguistica 1(1). https://doi.org/10.62408/ai-ling.v1i1.5
Gerhalter, Katharina. 2024. How do DeepL and ChatGPT process information structure and pragmatics? An exploratory case study on topicalized infini-tives in Spanish (and Portuguese). AI-Linguistica 1(1). https://doi.org/10.62408/ai-ling.v1i1.8
Gries, Stefan Th. 2009. What is corpus linguistics? Language and Linguistics Compass 3(5). 1225–1241. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-818X.2009.00149.x
Gries, Stefan Th. 2011. Methodological and interdisciplinary stance in corpus linguistics. In Viana, Vander & Zyngier, Sonia & Barnbrook, Geoff (eds), Perspectives on Corpus Linguistics, 81–98. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Grucza, Franciszek. 1983. Zagadnienia metalingwistyki. Lingwistyka – jej przedmiot, lingwistyka stosowana. Warszawa: PWN.
Jędrzejko, Ewa. 2018. Jeszcze o wieloparadygmatyczności i dylematach lingwistyki na progu trzeciego tysiąclecia. In Hawrysz, Magdalena & Uździcka, Marzanna (eds), Wokół dziejów używania polszczyzny – wspólnoty, potrzeby, zachowania komunikatywne, 107–120. Zielona Góra: Uniwersytet Zielonogórski.
Kuhn, Thomas S. 1970 [1962]. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (2nd edi-tion, enlarged). Chicago, London: University of Chicago Press.
Lehner, Sabine. 2025. The design and discursive construction of a “speaking” vacuum cleaning robot for assistive purposes: Findings on communication ideologies from a current research and development project. AI-Linguistica 2(1). https://doi.org/10.62408/ai-ling.v2i1.16
Li, Ziqi & Zhang, Qi. 2025. Linguistic differences between AI and human com-ments in Weibo: Detect AI-generated text through stylometric features. Pro-ceedings of the 24th China National Conference on Computational Linguis-tics. 842–851. https://aclanthology.org/2025.ccl-1.64.pdf (last accessed on 09/11/2026).
Ławrocki, Łukasz. 2026. Szkolenie z zakresu AI w ramach cyklu AI Filolog Ca-fé. https://lawrocki.pl (last accessed on 09/11/2026).
Mazur, Rafał. 2024. O poprawności językowej tekstów generowanych przez SI na przykładzie ChatuGPT. LingVaria 19(1). 119–138. https://doi.org/10.12797/LV.19.2024.37.08
Mizumoto, Atsushi & Yasuda, Sachiko & Tamura, Yu. 2024. Identifying ChatGPT-generated texts in EFL students’ writing: Through comparative analysis of linguistic fingerprints. Applied Corpus Linguistics 4(3). 100106. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acorp.2024.100106
Nitti, Paolo (ed.). 2026. AI-Generated Texts: Issues, Challenges and Operational Proposals. Firenze: Franco Cesati.
Paci, Walter & Gregori, Lorenzo & Acerboni, Giovanni & Panunzi, Alessandro & Perugini, Maria Roberta. 2024. Exploiting ChatGPT to simplify Italian bureaucratic and professional texts. AI-Linguistica 1(1). https://doi.org/10.62408/ai-ling.v1i1.13
Palmieri, Claudia. 2025. Vocabolari d’autore e intelligenza artificiale: è possibi-le creare il vocabolario della lingua di Boccaccio con ChatGPT? AI-Linguistica 2(2). https://doi.org/10.62408/ai-ling.v2i2.20
Percival, W. Keith. 1976. The applicability of Kuhn’s paradigms to the history of linguistics. Language 52(2). 285–294. https://doi.org/10.2307/412560
Saccà, Francesco. 2024. DeepL traduce Maraini: le poesie metasemantiche “sot-to gli occhi” della traduzione automatica. AI-Linguistica 1(1). https://doi.org/10.62408/ai-ling.v1i1.4
Samo, Giuseppe & Massaro, Angelapia. 2025. Syntactic patterns of Italo-Romance CP-layers in transformers, ChatGPT and Deepseek: Two case studies from Romansh and Neapolitan. AI-Linguistica 2(2). https://doi.org/10.62408/ai-ling.v2i2.25
Słapek, Daniel. 2017. Rozważania metajęzykoznawcze. Łódź: Primum Verbum.
Słapek, Daniel. 2026. Osservazioni sul costrutto ‘in + art. det. + infinito’. In Saržoska, Aleksandra & Trajkova, Mira (eds), Intrecci disciplinari: lingui-stica, traduzione e didattica in dialogo. Skopje: Univerzitet „Sv. Kiril i Me-todij” vo Skopje.
Stalmaszczyk, Piotr. 2018. O paradygmatach w językoznawstwie (na przykładzie językoznawstwa generatywnego). Linguistica Copernicana 15. 37–59. https://doi.org/10.12775/LinCop.2018.004
Stanič, Daša. 2025. La concettualizzazione metaforica dell’intelligenza artificia-le: Analisi del discorso giornalistico italiano contemporaneo. Linguistica 65(1). 185–203. https://doi.org/10.4312/linguistica.65.1.185-203
Storjohann, Petra. 2005. Corpus-driven vs. corpus-based approach to the study of relational patterns. In Proceedings of the Corpus Linguistics Conference 2005., 1–20. Birmingham: University of Birmingham. https://ids-pub.bsz-bw.de/frontdoor/deliver/index/docId/5006/file/Storjohann_Corpus_driven_vs_corpus_based_approach_to_the_study_of_relational_patterns_2005.pdf (last accessed on 09/11/2026).
Tavosanis, Mirko. 2025. Grammatica generata: analisi di alcune strutture presen-ti nei testi di ChatGPT in lingua italiana. AI-Linguistica 2(2). https://doi.org/10.62408/ai-ling.v2i2.23
Tognini-Bonelli, Elena. 2001. Corpus Linguistics at Work. Amster-dam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing.
Wilcox, Ethan Gotlieb & Futrell, Richard & Levy, Roger. 2024. Using computa-tional models to test syntactic learnability. Linguistic Inquiry 55(4). 805–848. https://doi.org/10.1162/ling_a_00491
Winston, Morton E. 1976. Did a (Kuhnian) Scientific revolution occur in linguis-tics? In Suppe, Frederick & Asquith, Peter D. (eds) Proceedings of the Bien-nial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association, Vol. I: Contributed Papers, 25–33. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. https://www.jstor.org/stable/192348 (last accessed on 09/11/2026).
Żmigrodzki, Piotr. 2003. Metalingwistyka jako krytyka idei i tekstów językoz-nawczych. Polonica 22–23. 5–18.
Details
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Daniel Słapek
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.