Limitations of Language Models in Other Languages

In the realm of artificial intelligence, language models (LLMs) like GPT-4, LLaMA, and Claude have garnered widespread acclaim for their remarkable ability to generate fluent and coherent text in English. However, as organizations and individuals increasingly turn to these models for multilingual applications like translation, it’s essential to recognize a crucial caveat: most LLMs were primarily trained on vast amounts of English data, making them less proficient in other languages. Just because these models excel in English doesn’t necessarily mean they possess the same level of proficiency in other languages.

A study conducted by Cornell University sheds light on this issue, revealing that LLMs tend to “think” in English, even when generating text in other languages. The study, published in a paper titled “Linguistic Colonialism: The Inherent English Bias of Pretrained Language Models” (available at https://arxiv.org/abs/2402.10588), explores how the predominance of English data during the training process biases LLMs towards English-centric thinking patterns and linguistic structures. Consequently, when tasked with generating text in languages other than English, LLMs may struggle to capture the nuances, idiomatic expressions, and cultural subtleties that characterize natural language use in those languages.

To put this into perspective, consider the training data composition of GPT-4, one of the most advanced LLMs to date. According to reports, GPT-4 was trained on a staggering 90% English content, with only a fraction of its training data consisting of other languages. Similarly, LLaMA and Claude, while boasting impressive capabilities in English, have limited exposure to non-English languages during their training. This disproportionate distribution of training data underscores the models’ inherent bias towards English and their limited proficiency in other languages.

The implications of these limitations are particularly relevant in multilingual contexts where accurate and culturally appropriate communication is paramount. For instance, in global business operations, legal proceedings, or diplomatic negotiations, the ability to convey information accurately and effectively across language barriers is crucial. Relying solely on LLMs to handle translation in such contexts may lead to misunderstandings, misinterpretations, and even diplomatic or legal ramifications.

Moreover, the limitations of LLMs in non-English languages have broader implications for linguistic diversity and inclusivity in AI development. As the field of artificial intelligence continues to evolve, there’s a pressing need to prioritize the development of multilingual models that can effectively serve diverse linguistic communities. This entails not only expanding the training data to include a more comprehensive representation of languages but also incorporating linguistic and cultural expertise into the model development process.

While LLMs demonstrate impressive capabilities in generating text in English, it’s crucial to recognize their limitations in other languages. The predominance of English data in their training corpus, coupled with inherent biases towards English-centric thinking, underscores the need to augment translations with human intelligence.

If you need your machine-translated content reviewed, we would be happy to review a translated document, website, or application and give you some honest feedback at no charge. Get a Translation Report Card (simultrans.com)