Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 cited by

Can LLMs Really Learn to Translate a Low-Resource Language from One Grammar Book?

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2409.19151 v2 pith:HDON4JVX submitted 2024-09-27 cs.CL

classification cs.CL
keywords translationbookgrammardatagrammaticalllmstaskslanguages
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Extremely low-resource (XLR) languages lack substantial corpora for training NLP models, motivating the use of all available resources such as dictionaries and grammar books. Machine Translation from One Book (Tanzer et al., 2024) suggests that prompting long-context LLMs with one grammar book enables English-Kalamang translation, an XLR language unseen by LLMs - a noteworthy case of linguistics helping an NLP task. We investigate the source of this translation ability, finding almost all improvements stem from the book's parallel examples rather than its grammatical explanations. We find similar results for Nepali and Guarani, seen low-resource languages, and we achieve performance comparable to an LLM with a grammar book by simply fine-tuning an encoder-decoder translation model. We then investigate where grammar books help by testing two linguistic tasks, grammaticality judgment and gloss prediction, and we explore what kind of grammatical knowledge helps by introducing a typological feature prompt that achieves leading results on these more relevant tasks. We thus emphasise the importance of task-appropriate data for XLR languages: parallel examples for translation, and grammatical data for linguistic tasks. As we find no evidence that long-context LLMs can make effective use of grammatical explanations for XLR translation, we conclude data collection for multilingual XLR tasks such as translation is best focused on parallel data over linguistic description.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 4 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Read it in Two Steps: Translating Extremely Low-Resource Languages with Code-Augmented Grammar Books

    cs.CL 2025-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Representing grammar rules as code functions and retrieving them rule-by-rule improves LLM translation of extremely low-resource languages, yielding up to a 13.1% chrF++ gain over full grammar book prompting.

  2. Compensating for Data with Reasoning: Low-Resource Machine Translation with LLMs

    cs.CL 2025-05 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Fragment-Shot Prompting, which retrieves example translations for sentence fragments, substantially improves LLM translation into and between Ladin variants but not into Italian.

  3. A POS Tier Is the Key to Automated Annotation for Low-Resource Language Documentation: Neural Interlinear Glossing for Irabu, a Southern Ryukyuan Language

    cs.CL 2026-07 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    For Irabu Ryukyuan, a POS tier improves neural grammatical glossing by +4.4 points with oracle POS and can more than halve data needs, but current tagger errors cancel the gain in a fully automatic pipeline.

  4. Explain-then-Process: Using Grammar Prompting to Enhance Grammatical Acceptability Judgments

    cs.CL 2025-06 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    Feeding an LLM-generated grammar explanation back to a model before a grammaticality judgment improves minimal-pair accuracy, with the largest gains for smaller models.

Pith tools