AshvinP wrote: ↑Mon Jul 15, 2024 12:57 am Thanks for this analysis, Federica! Most importantly, I think you are the first to find a spiritually redemptive function for GPT style LLM on this forum. (aside from the search engine utility)![]()
I am not exactly sure what it reveals in this context, if much of anything, but the general idea of studying patterns of linguistic development seems like it could be pretty useful as spiritual feedback along the inner path.
The analysis here reminds me of what I wrote in Part I:
Every sensation in the life story was a tiny impact by which spiritual activity became a bit more conscious of itself, just as a verb is anchored by its nouns. Try to imagine the meaning of ‘falling’ in the absence of any object. This will be experienced as very difficult, as if we are lost in a forest, trying to find due north, but our compass needle keeps swinging back and forth. On the other hand, when we imagine a definite object falling, let’s say an apple, the meaning of the verb is anchored for us – we gain a stable orientation within the flow of activity.
A core element of retracing is learning to orient more within the realm of verbs (spiritual activity) without anchoring its meaning with nouns (perceptions), at least not the sort of fragmented spatiotemporal nouns that we are used to. In that sense, the trend of using more intransitive verbs could be a sign of some imaginative development, better orientation to spiritual activity that isn't necessarily acting on some definite sense-based object. It seems to me that would naturally become more utilized as one starts to try and illustrate higher stages of development, which I was in no position to do with the early essays. Although I have to admit that, after surveying the lists that were provided and comparing them, the primary feedback for me is that I can't easily spot the difference between transitive and intransitive verbs![]()
Oh, it would have been nice to find a redemptive function on sale, like I did here, but for the time being it looks like it's failed. It was too cheap to be good enough!

Indeed, when looking closely at the items in the lists, either Chat GPT is not the right tool to detect transitive versus intransitive verb use, or I never realized what a transitive or intransitive verb really is

In any case, yes, the idea was that an increase in the choice of intransitive verbs suggests a thought process that is less anchored to some determined end point for the semantic trajectory sparkled by the verb. Instead of being inexorably attracted by a direct object, the meaning is constellated by surrounding characterizations of the action. There is more openness to the activity. The focus of attention is not zoomed in on an object, but out, within the context. Of course, there are many 'inevitable' verbs that are plain transitive, therefore what's interesting is to look at verbs that can assume both forms. For example, the verb "attract" has both forms. You wrote: "our thoughts will continue to attract around its ‘center of gravity’", using the verb intransitively. To be precise, here it's even used in a new intransitive form, compared to what the Merriam Webster says the intransitive use of "attract" is. In fact, you used it with a meaning of "be attracted", that is, you turned around a passive meaning (passive forms are as constrained as their specular transitive ones), and made it into an intransitive - in this case, in a way that is not even contemplated in the dictionary (of course I can't evaluate this conclusively, but I would be interested in what mother tongue speakers think). A couple of lines below you wrote: "and its mental and emotional states will continue to iterate over its meaning" which, again, seems to be an intransitive use of "iterate" that the Merriam Webster knows nothing about

There are many more such examples of innovative verb use in your posts.