Analysis: ChatGPT and Gemini tools may help with languages, but achieving fluency on their own is not proven
Research suggests that the ChatGPT and Gemini tools help practice speaking and writing. However, evidence that they alone are sufficient to achieve fluency is lacking. A review of 51 studies points to errors in feedback as well as excessive reliance on AI.
An article in The Conversation examines the benefits and limitations of the ChatGPT and Gemini tools in learning foreign languages. The described research suggests that repeated conversations using voice features can improve speaking fluency and accuracy; feedback on writing can help with grammar, sentence structure, and clarity. Some learners also perceive a conversation with AI as less stressful than a conversation with a person. However, evidence that using these tools alone is sufficient to achieve language fluency is lacking.
A review of 51 studies focused on AI feedback on writing in a second language found that recommendations may contain errors or misinterpret the intended meaning. Some studies also describe excessive reliance by learners on AI and reduced independence in decisions about their own text. The article recommends evaluating individual suggestions, verifying that meaning is preserved, and trying out the knowledge gained in new sentences. Existing research has a limited scope: activities in one review lasted from a single teaching session to approximately four months, most studies concern adults, and most often concern English.
The tools can also help with listening and understanding difficult texts, but they do not replace the cultural experience and emotional support of a person. The article points out cultural bias and stereotypes in responses as well as privacy concerns: service providers may log text and voice data. Practicing a job interview with real information about the employer can thus involve sharing confidential information.
Why it matters
Learners may gain more opportunities for repeated speaking and immediate feedback on writing, especially if a conversation with a person causes them stress. However, the benefit depends on critically evaluating corrections; AI recommendations may change the meaning or contain errors. When practicing work-related situations, it is also necessary to watch what information about the employer one enters into the service.
Two audiences, two different impacts
What this means
For individuals
For independent study, the tools can be used to repeat conversations and revise one's own texts. Suggested corrections need to be evaluated, and contact with people should also be maintained; using AI by itself has no proven sufficiency for achieving fluency.
For a business
Language practice of work situations can lead to sharing confidential information about the employer with a service whose provider may log both text and voice. For a company, this represents a risk tied to the content entered during practice.
Risks and complianceCheck the original
Event sources
only one source so far · 1 publisher, 1 independent. We count feeds from the same owner only once.