Measuring how semantics of words change over time improves our understanding of how cultures and perspectives change. Diachronic word embeddings help us quantify this shift, although previous studies leveraged substantial temporally annotated corpora. In this work, we use a corpus of 9.5 million Croatian news articles spanning the past 25 years and quantify semantic change using skip-gram word embeddings trained on five-year periods. Our analysis finds that word embeddings capture linguistic shifts of terms pertaining to major topics in this timespan (COVID-19, Croatia joining the European Union, technological advancements). We also find evidence that embeddings from post-2020 encode increased positivity in sentiment analysis tasks, contrasting studies reporting a decline in mental health over the same period.

The identification of political actors who put forward claims in public debate is a crucial step in the construction of discourse networks, which are helpful to analyze societal debates. Actor identification is, however, rather challenging: Often, the locally mentioned speaker of a claim is only a pronoun (“He proposed that [claim]”), so recovering the canonical actor name requires discourse understanding. We compare a traditional pipeline of dedicated NLP components (similar to those applied to the related task of coreference) with a LLM, which appears a good match for this generation task. Evaluating on a corpus of German actors in newspaper reports, we find surprisingly that the LLM performs worse. Further analysis reveals that the LLM is very good at identifying the right reference, but struggles to generate the correct canonical form. This points to an underlying issue in LLMs with controlling generated output. Indeed, a hybrid model combining the LLM with a classifier to normalize its output substantially outperforms both initial models.

Due to the widespread use of large language models (LLMs), we need to understand whether they embed a specific “worldview” and what these views reflect. Recent studies report that, prompted with political questionnaires, LLMs show left-liberal leanings (Feng et al., 2023; Motoki et al., 2024). However, it is as yet unclear whether these leanings are reliable (robust to prompt variations) and whether the leaning is consistent across policies and political leaning. We propose a series of tests which assess the reliability and consistency of LLMs’ stances on political statements based on a dataset of voting-advice questionnaires collected from seven EU countries and annotated for policy issues. We study LLMs ranging in size from 7B to 70B parameters and find that their reliability increases with parameter count. Larger models show overall stronger alignment with left-leaning parties but differ among policy programs: They show a (left-wing) positive stance towards environment protection, social welfare state, and liberal society but also (right-wing) law and order, with no consistent preferences in the areas of foreign policy and migration.

Sentiment analysis is often used to examine how different actors are portrayed in the media, and analysis of news headlines is of particular interest due to their attention-grabbing role. We address the task of entity-level sentiment analysis from Croatian news headlines. We frame the task as targeted sentiment analysis (TSA), explicitly differentiating between sentiment toward a named entity and the overall tone of the headline. We describe SToNe, a new dataset for this task with sentiment and tone labels. We implement several neural benchmark models, utilizing single- and multi-task training, and show that TSA can benefit from tone information. Finally, we gauge the difficulty of this task by leveraging dataset cartography.