i hate writing like chatgpt

A handful of times in the last week, I've been writing something — an assignment, a journal entry, an article — and noticed a particular tendency: the "not x — y" or "not x, y" sentence structure. It's an appealing format; it emphasizes the "y" point and creates a clear comparison so that the reader can better understand what you're saying. Yet, every single time I write a sentence that employs that technique, I find myself deleting my own words.

A few weeks ago, I read this article in the new york times:

Why Does A.I. Write Like … That?

If only they were robotic! Instead, chatbots have developed a distinctive — and grating — voice.

It specifically points to the "not x — y" structure as a hallmark of LLM-generated text. While there are plenty of other tells (such as the word "delve", the use of the em-dash in general, and a litany of other vocabulary choices that can be chalked up to overfitting), the xy dichotomy is noticeable.

Now that I am aware of its existence, I can't stop seeing it. I find it in news articles, in instagram posts, in skeets, and in my own thoughts. It's not just common — it's pervasive.

I hate that this turn of phrase has wormed its way into my brain. I wonder how often I'd used it in the past without realizing that its prevalence in my writing can be directly tied to reading LLM slop — whether willingly or not. It's alarming to recognize that your vocabulary, your phrases, your style of speech are not your own.

Before, I might have reveled in that fact. Yes, the way I talk and write was never determined by me. It has more to do with my parents, friends, and teachers than anything I actively chose. However, there's something unnerving about knowing that beyond the people I love, there is some uncontrollable, overfit, junk-filled imitation machine living somewhere deep in my mind. I hate to think about it. It makes my skin crawl.

My nature writing professor said something in class today that stuck with me: "convince me you are not AI. give me a unique perspective." Yes, my perspective is what differentiates me from the robot that constantly gestures at depth, yet is filled with fluff. But if the words and phrases I use to convey my perspective are directly influenced by the LLM, then how much have I really triumphed? In deleting my words, am I escaping the machine or limiting myself? Am I simply trading "not x — y" for some other LLM-influenced turn of phrase? The truth is, I don't know. Once it's in there, it's impossible know.

It is a terrifying thing to have a tapeworm in your head.