TurBLiMP: A Turkish Benchmark of Linguistic Minimal Pairs

We introduce TurBLiMP, the first Turkish benchmark of linguistic minimal pairs, designed to evaluate the linguistic abilities of monolingual and multilingual language models (LMs). Covering 16 linguistic phenomena with 1000 minimal pairs each, TurBLiMP fills an important gap in linguistic evaluation resources for Turkish. In designing the benchmark, we give extra attention to two properties of Turkish that remain understudied in current syntactic evaluations of LMs, namely word order flexibility and subordination through morphological processes. Our experiments on a wide range of LMs and a newly collected set of human acceptability judgments reveal that even cutting-edge Large LMs still struggle with grammatical phenomena that are not challenging for humans, and may also exhibit different sensitivities to word order and morphological complexity compared to humans.

Child-Directed Language Does Not Consistently Boost Syntax Learning in Language Models

Seminal work by Huebner et al. (2021) showed that language models (LMs) trained on English Child-Directed Language (CDL) can reach similar syntactic abilities as LMs trained on much larger amounts of adult-directed written text, suggesting that CDL could provide more effective LM training material than the commonly used internet-crawled data. However, the generalizability of these results across languages, model types, and evaluation settings remains unclear. We test this by comparing models trained on CDL vs. Wikipedia across two LM objectives (masked and causal), three languages (English, French, German), and three syntactic minimal-pair benchmarks. Our results on these benchmarks show inconsistent benefits of CDL, which in most cases is outperformed by Wikipedia models. We then identify various shortcomings in previous benchmarks, and introduce a novel testing methodology, FIT-CLAMS, which uses a frequency-controlled design to enable balanced comparisons across training corpora. Through minimal pair evaluations and regression analysis we show that training on CDL does not yield stronger generalizations for acquiring syntax and highlight the importance of controlling for frequency effects when evaluating syntactic ability.