SavedAdd your journal

Journals / İstanbul Üniversitesi Sosyoloji Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 46 Sayı: 1

From Form to Ratification: Reassessing AI “Communication” After the Facebook Chatbot Episode

Tolga Yıldız(ISTANBUL UNIVERSITY)0000-0001-9293-2013
Pages
455–473
Publication Date
2026-07-28
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The article’s contribution lies in shifting the debate from inner-state attribution to the social conditions under which signs become language.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This article revisits the 2017 Facebook negotiation-bot episode, widely reported as a case of artificial intelligence “inventing a language,” to ask a narrower and more sociologically precise question: under what conditions should machine output count as language rather than as task-conditioned symbol coordination?
📊
Key Findings & Data:Contemporary AI systems can generate linguistically legible forms and sometimes support limited coordination, but language in the stronger sense depends on public uptake, normative correction, and institutional durability.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The article’s contribution lies in shifting the debate from inner-state attribution to the social conditions under which signs become language.
🔬Design:Review & Systematic Survey
📍Scope:2017 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Chatbot · Large language models · Shared intentionality

Abstract

This article revisits the 2017 Facebook negotiation-bot episode, widely reported as a case of artificial intelligence “inventing a language,” to ask a narrower and more sociologically precise question: under what conditions should machine output count as language rather than as task-conditioned symbol coordination? Methodologically, the article is a narrative review and conceptual synthesis organized in line with the Scale for the Assessment of Narrative Review Articles (SANRA). It draws on purposively selected work in developmental psychology, philosophy of mind, sociology, and recent research literature on large language models (LLMs). The analysis proceeds in three steps. First, it shows that the Facebook case involved a reinforcement-learning negotiation agent and cannot be generalized to contemporary LLMs without serious qualification. Second, it argues that current debates about AI “understanding” are best read not as a choice between hype and dismissal but as disputes about different kinds of competence. Third, it develops a sociological distinction between form, coordination, and ratification. Contemporary AI systems can generate linguistically legible forms and sometimes support limited coordination, but language in the stronger sense depends on public uptake, normative correction, and institutional durability. The article’s contribution lies in shifting the debate from inner-state attribution to the social conditions under which signs become language.

🔖

Cite This Article

Yıldız, T. (2026). From Form to Ratification: Reassessing AI “Communication” After the Facebook Chatbot Episode. İstanbul Üniversitesi Sosyoloji Dergisi, Cilt: 46 Sayı: 1, 455–473. https://doi.org/10.26650/SJ.2025.46.1.1019

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (22)

  1. Baethge, C., Goldbeck-Wood, S., & Mertens, S. (2019). SANRA - a scale for the quality assessment of narrative review articles. Research Integrity and Peer Review, 4 (1), Article 5. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41073-019-0064-8. google scholar
  2. Bender, E. M., & Koller, A. (2020). Climbing towards NLU: On meaning, form, and understanding in the age of data. In D. Jurafsky, J. Chai, N. Schluter, & J. Tetreault (Eds.), Proceedings of the 58th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (pp. 5185–5198). Association for Computational Linguistics. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2020.acl-main.463. google scholar
  3. Berger, P. L., & Luckmann, T. (1966). The social construction of reality: A treatise in the sociology of knowledge. Anchor Books. google scholar
  4. Bourdieu, P. (1991). Language and symbolic power (J. B. Thompson, Ed. G. Raymond & M. Adamson, Trans.). Harvard University Press. google scholar
  5. Cuskley, C., Woods, R., & Flaherty, M. (2024). The limitations of large language models for understanding human language and cognition. Open Mind, 8, 1058–1083. https://doi.org/10.1162/opmi_a_00160. google scholar
  6. Dennett, D. C. (1987). The intentional stance. MIT Press. google scholar
  7. Epley, N. (2014). Mindwise: How we understand what others think, believe, feel, and want. Alfred A. Knopf. google scholar
  8. Lewis, M., Yarats, D., Dauphin, Y., Parikh, D., & Batra, D. (2017). Deal or no deal? End-to-end learning of negotiation dialogues. In M. Palmer, R. Hwa, & S. Riedel (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2017 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (pp. 2443–2453). Association for Computational Linguistics. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/D17-1259. google scholar
  9. Mahowald, K., Ivanova, A. A., Blank, I. A., Kanwisher, N., Tenenbaum, J. B., & Fedorenko, E. (2024). Dissociating language and thought in large language models. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 28 (6), 517–540. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2024.01.011. google scholar
  10. Mead, G. H. (1934). Mind, self, and society (C. W. Morris, Ed.). University of Chicago Press. google scholar
  11. Messeri, L., & Crockett, M. J. (2024). Artificial intelligence and illusions of understanding in scientific research. Nature, 627 (8002), 49–58. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-024-07146-0. google scholar
  12. Mitchell, M., & Krakauer, D. C. (2023). The debate over understanding in AI’s large language models. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 120 (13), e2215907120. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2215907120. google scholar
  13. Putnam, H. (1975). Philosophical papers: Vol. 2. Mind, language and reality. Cambridge University Press. google scholar
  14. Schaeffer, R., Miranda, B., & Koyejo, S. (2023). Are emergent abilities of large language models a mirage? In A. Oh, T. Naumann, A. Globerson, K. Saenko, M. Hardt, & S. Levine (Eds.), Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (Vol. 36, pp. 55565–55581). Curran Associates. google scholar
  15. Searle, J. R. (1980). Minds, brains, and programs. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 3 (3), 417–457. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00005756. google scholar
  16. Shanahan, M. (2024). Talking about large language models. Communications of the ACM, 67 (2), 68–79. https://doi.org/10.1145/3624724. google scholar
  17. Suchman, L. A. (2007). Human-machine reconfigurations: Plans and situated actions (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press. google scholar
  18. Tomasello, M. (2008). Origins of human communication. MIT Press. google scholar
  19. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press. google scholar
  20. Weizenbaum, J. (1976). Computer power and human reason: From judgment to calculation. W. H. Freeman. google scholar
  21. Wittgenstein, L. (1953). Philosophical investigations (G. E. M. Anscombe, Trans.). Blackwell. google scholar
  22. Woolgar, S. (1985). Why not a sociology of machines? The case of sociology and artificial intelligence. Sociology, 19 (4), 557–572. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038038585019004005. google scholar