AI tools as affordances and contradictions for EFL writers: Emic perspectives and L1 use as a resource

Abstract

This article responds to Warschauer et al. (this issue), which discusses the affordances and challenges generative AI tools offer the L2 writing field. Although the contradictions posited by Warschauer et al. resonate deeply, they seem somewhat lacking. Of these, two are conspicuous and related to the L2 writers themselves: (1) the emic (insider) perspective, and (2) an exploration of the writer's L1 literacy as a resource for L2 writing. I explore two of the three contradictions discussed by Warschauer et al. and offer alternative viewpoints grounded in emic and L1 literacy perspectives. In support, I use a study my colleagues and I recently completed (Sasaki et al., under review), which compared the effects of teacher corrective feedback (TCF) and AI machine translation (MT) as feedback. The findings of the study show that especially in EFL contexts, (a) AI can enhance L2 writing, with L2 writers’ L1 literacy being a crucial factor in this improvement, and (b) AI tools can raise L2 writers’ ability at all levels if used strategically. The article advocates a non-deficit view of L2 writers, with AI having the potential to further empower them, minimize unnecessary challenges, and ultimately foster academic inclusivity and excellence.