The integration of Generative AI (GenAI) into language learning offers second language (L2) writers powerful tools for text optimization. However, pursuing native-like fluency often sacrifices sociopragmatic diversity. Investigating "pragmatic flattening" - the systematic erasure of culturally preferred politeness and authorial stance - this study conducts a comparative analysis of argumentative essays by Chinese B2-level university students from the ICNALE corpus. The original texts were polished via the APIs of four leading Large Language Models at a zero-temperature setting for reproducibility. Findings reveal a nuanced "dimensional divergence" within the Semantic Preservation Paradox. While models corrected lexicogrammatical errors and retained propositional meaning, sociopragmatic interventions were bifurcated. In the interactive dimension, all models showed a drastic collapse of dialogic engagement markers, turning negotiated discourse into monologic assertions. Conversely, in the epistemic stance dimension, models showed architecture-based variability: some aggressively scrubbed epistemic markers, while others reinforced tentative hedging as decontextualized algorithmic caution. This confirms that while GenAI enhances accuracy, it systematically overwrites L2 writers' unique rhetorical identities into a homogenized Anglo-American paradigm. We argue that future instruction must move beyond error correction, advocating for Critical AI Literacy to empower multilingual writers to use GenAI for linguistic enhancement while safeguarding sociopragmatic diversity and rhetorical agency.