Antonym and Oppositeness: A Cognitive Training Approach of Thinking in English Writing in the AI Era

Xiaohui Liang; Yuwei Huang; Yuanyuan Wang

doi:10.61187/ci.v2i2.112

Authors

Xiaohui Liang School of Foreign Studies, University of Science & Technology Beijing, Beijing 100083, China
Yuwei Huang School of Foreign Studies, University of Science & Technology Beijing, Beijing 100083, China
Yuanyuan Wang
d202210542@xs.ustb.edu.cn
School of Foreign Studies, University of Science & Technology Beijing, Beijing 100083, China

Keywords:

English Writing, Oppositeness, Antonym, Cognitive Awareness, AI Writing

Abstract

Oppositeness is not necessarily identical to antonym, but it imparts wisdom in the teaching of writing, particularly in era of AI. Starting from the “construction of oppositeness” in cognitive realm, this paper explores the foundation of writing with innovative thinking, which aims to cultivate innovative ability and counteract the impact of AI writing. The cognitive recognition of oppositeness in writing encompasses the comprehension and utilization of contrasts, antonyms and conflicting concepts to foster a more dynamic and captivating textual composition. Adopting a reverse mindset (oppositeness) aids in averting monotony in writing while AI-generated content can occasionally become repetitive and monotonous. The cognitive awareness of oppositeness assists in introducing diversity and preventing predictability in writing. By employing oppositeness, one can enhance the reader's comprehension of novel concepts by establishing intricate connections with familiar ones. As a creative thinking technique in writing, it serves as a potent tool for human writers to uphold their pertinence and distinctiveness amidst the proliferation of AI-generated content. By facilitating the production of unparalleled and authentic material, creative thinking transcends AI's capacity to replicate such output. While AI can generate content based on preexisting data and patterns, genuine creativity nurtures groundbreaking ideas and perspectives that transcend the limitations of an AI's dataset.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Coxhead, & A. (2012). Academic vocabulary, writing and english for academic purposes: perspectives from second language learners. Relc Journal, 43(1), 137-145. https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688212439323

Poe, M., & Elliot, N. (2019). Evidence of fairness? Twenty-five years of research in Assessing Writing. Assessing Writing, 42, 1-21. https:/doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2019.100418

Barrot, J. S.. (2020). Integrating Technology into ESL/EFL Writing through Grammarly. RELC Journal, 53(3), 003368822096663. https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688220966632

Coenen, A, Davis, L, Ippolito, D, Et AL. (2021). Wordcraft: a Human-AI Collaborative Editor For Story Writing. Arxiv Preprint Arxiv, 7, 30. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2107.07430

Fitria, T. (2021). Quillbot As An Online Tool: Students' Alternative In Paraphrasing And Rewriting Of English Writing. English: Journal Of Language, Education, And Humanities. 9(1), 183-196. https://doi.org/10.22373/ej.v9i1.10233

Deutch, Y. (2003). Needs Analysis for Academic Legal English Courses in Israel: A Model of Setting Priorities. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, (2),125-146. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1475-1585(03)00013-4

Flowerdew, J., Peacock, M.(2001). Issues in EAP: A Preliminary Perspective. In Flowerdew J & Peacock M(eds.). Research Perspective on English for Academic Purposes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 8. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524766.004

Croft, W., Cruse, A. Cognitive Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511803864

James, M. A. (2010). An Investigation of Learning Transfer in English-for-general-academic-purposes Writing Instruction. Journal of Second Language Writing, a(4), 183-206. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2010.09.003

Gordon, C., Braun C. (1986). Mental Process in Reading and Writing: A Critical Look at Self-reports as Supportive Data. Journal of Educational Research, (79), 292-301. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.1986.10885694

Xin, Z. (2023). Leveraging Artificial Intelligence (AI) Technology for English Writing: Introducing Wordtune as a Digital Writing Assistant for EFL Writers. RELC Journal.54(3) 890-894. https://doi.org/10.1177/00336882221094089

Kim, Y., Graham, S. (2022). Expanding the direct and indirect effects model of writing (DIEW), Reading-writing relations, and dynamic relations as a function of measurement/ dimensions of written composition. Journal of Educational Psychology, 114(2), 215-238. https://doi.org/10. 1037/edu0000564

Hyland, K., Hamp, L. (2002). EAP: Issues and Directions. Journal of English for Academic Purpose, (1), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1475-1585(02)00002-4

James, M. A.(2010). Transfer Climate and EAP Education: Students' Perceptions of Challenges to Learning Transfer. English for Specific Purposes, (2), 133-147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2009.09.002

Jordan, R. R. (1997). English for Academic Purposes: A Guide and Resource Book for Teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511733062

Turner, J. (2004). Language as Academic Purpose. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, (3),11-17. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1475-1585(03)00054-7

Carvalho, L., Martinez M. R., Tsai, Y. S., Markauskaite, L., De Laat, M. (2022). How can we design for learning in an AI world? Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, (3), 1-9. https://doi.org/10. 1016/j.caeai.2022.100053

Kim, M., Tian, Y., Crossley, S. A. (2021). Exploring the relationships among cognitive and linguistic resources, writing pro-cesses, and written products in second language writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 53, 100824. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2021.100824

Graham, S., Harris, K. R. (2019). Evidence-based practices in writing. In S. Graham, C. MacArthur, & M. Hebert (Eds.), Best practices in writing instruction, 3-28.

MacArthur, C. A., Jennings, A., Philippakos, Z. A. (2019). Which linguistic features predict quality of argumentative writing for college basic writers, and how do those features change with instruction? Reading and Writing, 32(6), 1553-1574. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-018-9853-6

Kellogg, R. (1988). Attentional Overload and Writing Performance: Effects of Rough Draft and Outline Strategies. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, (14), 355-365. https://doi.org/10.1037//0278-7393.14.2.355

Pennycook, A. (1997). Vulgar Pragmatism, Critical Pragmatism, and EAP. English for Specific Purposes, (16), 253–269. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-4906(97)00019-7

Taylor, B. (1985). Improving Middle-graded Students’ Reading and Writing of Expository Text. Journal of Educational Re-search (79), 119-125. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.1985.10885661

Li, J. (2021). Research on AI-assisted hybrid teaching for English writing. In 2021 International Conference on Computers, Information Processing and Advanced Education (CIPAE), 309-312. https://doi.org/10.1109/CIPAE53742.2021.00080

Woodall, B. (2002). Language-switching: Using the First Language While Writing in a Second Language. Journal of Second Language Writing, (11), 7-28. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(01)00051-0

Zimmerman, B. & R. (1997). Riesemberg. Becoming a Self-regulated Writer: A Social Cognitive Perspective. Contemporary Educational Psychology, (22), 73-101. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1997.0919

Cotton, D. R., Cotton, P. A., Shipway, J. R. (2023). Chatting and cheating: Ensuring academic integrity in the era of ChatGPT. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 61(2), 228- -239. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2023.2190148

Stacey, S. (2022). Cheating on your college essay with ChatGPT won't get you good grades, say professors—But AI could make education fairer. Business Insider.

Fang, Y. (2010). Perceptions of the Computer-Assisted Writing Program among EFL College Learners. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 13(3), 246-256.

Cai J. (2012). Demand Analysis and Teaching Method Research on “Academic English” curriculum. Foreign Language Teaching Theory and Practice, (2), 30-35.

Cai J. (2012). A study on the orientation of College English teaching in the context of educational Internationalization. Foreign Languages, (1), 69-76.

Li L. (2011). Design of Writing Evaluation Model for English Majors: Oriented on Cultivating Critical Thinking Ability. For-eign Languages and Foreign Language Teaching, (1), 31-35.

Liang X. H.( 2014). Academic English Reading and Writing Course. Beijing: Higher Education Press.

Nazari, S., Setiawan. (.2021). Application Of Artificial Intelligence Powered Digital Writing Assistant In Higher Education: Randomized Controlled Trial. Heliyon, 7(5), e07014. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e07014

Winans (2021). Grammarly' s Tone Detector: Helping Students Write Pragmatically Appropriate Texts. Relc Journal, 52(2), 348--352. https://doi.org/10.1177/00336882211010506

Nobles., Paganucci. (2015). Do Digital Writing Tools Deliver? Student Perceptions Of Writing Quality Using Digital Tools And Online Writing Environments. Computers And Composition, 38(1), 16-31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compcom.2015.09.001

Perin, D., Lauterbach, M. (2016). Assessing text-based writing of low-skilled college students. International Journal of Arti-ficial Intelligence in Education, 28(1), 56-78. https://doi.org/ 10.1007/s40593-016-0122-z

Reilly, D., Neumann, D., Andrews, G. (2019). Sex differences in reading and writing achievement: Evidence from the Na-tional Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). American Psychologist, 74(4), 445-458. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000356