International Conference | A Report
Syntax and Semantics in the AI Era
Indus Arts and Science International College in Erode
11 September 2026
I was so happy to be part of the International Conference on the theme, “Syntax and Semantics in the AI Era”, organised by the Indus Arts and Science International College in Erode. The Conference saw more than 250 participants from across India, on both online and offline modes put together.
The Conference explored the profound intersections of artificial intelligence, linguistic structure, and human connection.
After the delegate registration and an invocation, followed by a formal welcome address and the lighting of the lamp, Dr. A. Esther Shanthini then outlined the conference’s core objectives. The Conference was formally inaugurated by Dr. Samuel Rufus, Associate Professor of English, Madras Christian College, Chennai.
The morning featured a robust line-up of five technical sessions that tackled various aspects of AI - as a technological utility, as a creative help and as a cultural force.
Mr. Nifraz Rifaz opened the technical session by contrasting structural syntax with genuine semantics, emphasizing the irreplaceable value of human meaning-making and intentionality against the rise of automated, generic content.
He emphasised on the difference between syntax (how we structure words) and semantics (the actual meaning behind what we communicate). Drawing from his corporate communications experience across Hong Kong, London, and Sri Lanka, he critiqued the rise of obvious, AI-generated content on platforms like LinkedIn, noting that humans tend to skip over this disingenuous content.
Advocating the importance of purposeful writing, he discussed the irreplaceable human element in writing, explaining how human writers consciously adapt the same language to build deep meaning and connection tailored to specific audiences - something generative AI struggles to do in an authentic way!
Dr. Rufus’s address focused on how meaning is constructed in the digital sphere and why human experience remains irreplaceable. He highlighted that modern communication relies heavily on multi-modal elements - incorporating visual, gestural, oral, linguistic, and spatial cues. In digital spaces, subtle choices like using all caps or specific emojis dictate the tone, and misusing them easily leads to miscommunication.
Referencing Marcus du Sautoy’s book titled, The Creativity Code, he noted that AI has encroached upon creativity, which was once considered the final exclusive domain of human beings. However, he argued that AI fundamentally lacks “embodied subjectivity” - it can simulate writing about love or sacrifice, but it has no actual feelings, memories, or lived experiences to draw upon!
Moreover, he also cautioned that, AI systems suffer from a “garbage in, garbage out” (GIGO) bias, as the vast majority of historical digital archives they are trained on are West-centric. He emphasised the urgent need to preserve and digitise local, indigenous knowledge systems to prevent cultural identity from being erased in the AI era.
Dr. Nithin Varghese, HoD, English, St. Berchmans College, Changanaserry, spoke on “Why Literature Still Belongs to Human Hearts”. He explored the nature of literary authorship, arguing that human flaws and imperfections are exactly what make literature valuable. Since Large Language Models (LLMs) do not “think”, they operate on a statistical curve to predict the next logical word in a sequence. While an AI can write a technically perfect poem about heartbreak, it completely lacks the sincerity of lived experience, he added.
Using famous literary anachronisms from Shakespeare and Cervantes as examples, he illustrated that human storytelling inherently contains “anachronistic errors” and mistakes. Research shows that readers actually perceive text with minor, corrected typos as more empathetic and human, while flawless, grammatically perfect AI text feels cold and synthetic!
He also noted that despite modern literary theories like the “Death of the Author,” legal frameworks and copyright laws still demand a natural person to take responsibility and exert creative will behind a text. Rather than fighting a losing battle against AI usage, he suggested changing how students are assessed, favouring in-class, collaborative problem-solving over take-home essays! He urged the participants to use AI ethically, relying on it only as an assistant while maintaining their own critical thinking.
Dr. N. Tamizhini (Assistant Professor of English, Thiruvalluvar University, Vellore) spoke on the topic, “The Heart of Hardware: A Love Affair with AI”. Her talk shifted the focus from text and language to the deep and often complicated psychological relationships human beings are developing with conversational artificial intelligence.
She pointed out that while we know machines cannot feel, AI is designed to reflect feeling back to us. This provides a soothing “synthetic warmth.” Humans are biologically conditioned to assume that something which responds and converses is “alive,” leading us to form genuine emotional attachments to entities that feel nothing for us in return, she said.
She also highlighted a growing trend, particularly among Gen Z, of using AI chatbots to resolve personal and interpersonal problems. AI is available 24/7, listens without judgment, and carries “zero risk” compared to the messy complexities of human relationships. However, she warned that constantly relying on AI for companionship might lead to severe social isolation.
Dr. Thamizhini then shared a compelling anecdote about a student who would talk affectionately to a voice assistant, but genuinely bash and scold it when it gave nonsensical answers - proving how easily we map human social expectations and frustrations onto software.
She signed off by saying that, while AI can mimic human empathy flawlessly, outsourcing our need for belongingness to a machine risks costing us our emotional autonomy and our connections to one another.
Dr. Niruba S. Jayasundara from Eastern University, Sri Lanka, spoke on “Decolonising Digital Discourse and Linguistic Rights in AI”.
Dr. Niruba argued that whenever AI is used in critical sectors like education, healthcare, or public administration, citizens must be informed that an automated system is in use and have the option for human review. Digital accessibility must include local language accessibility. Crucial government, health, and emergency platforms should not assume English proficiency, she added.
In this regard, she called for countries like India, Sri Lanka, and Bangladesh to collaborate on open-source tools and regional speech databases to reduce dependency on imported Western AI systems.
She also highlighted that AI inherently inherits the inequalities of its data and designers. She advocated for a decolonised digital future where languages like Sinhala, Tamil, and Bengali shape the AI landscape natively, rather than treating English as the sole “language of intelligence” or reducing local dialects to mere translation targets, she signed off!
Following a brief interactive panel discussion, and a vibrant folk theatrical performance by Erode Nadaga Kuzhu, the afternoon session had hybrid research paper presentations.
The proceedings wrapped up with a best paper evaluation and a closing vote of thanks, officially concluding at 3:30 PM.
The International Conference was meticulously organised, and all the events in the schedule went like clock-work! Hearty congratulations to Prof. Balakrishnan and his vibrant team for working tirelessly day in and day out, in making this Conference a grand success. A special word of appreciation to the MC of the event from Bishop Heber College, who showed great presence of mind and thoughtfulness even while making the programme lively and vibrant with her observations.
On the whole, a rewarding day in every way!
.jpeg)
.jpeg)
.jpeg)
.jpeg)
