The success of large pretrained language models (LMs) such as BERT and RoBERTa has sparked interest in probing their representations, in order to unveil what types of knowledge they implicitly capture. While prior research focused on morphosyntactic, semantic, and world knowledge, it remains unclear to which extent LMs also derive lexical type-level knowledge from words in context. In this work, we present a systematic empirical analysis across six typologically diverse languages and five different lexical tasks, addressing the following questions: 1) How do different lexical knowledge extraction strategies (monolingual versus multilingual source LM, out-of-context versus in-context encoding, inclusion of special tokens, and layer-wise averaging) impact performance? How consistent are the observed effects across tasks and languages? 2) Is lexical knowledge stored in few parameters, or is it scattered throughout the network? 3) How do these representations fare against traditional static word vectors in lexical tasks 4) Does the lexical information emerging from independently trained monolingual LMs display latent similarities? Our main results indicate patterns and best practices that hold universally, but also point to prominent variations across languages and tasks. Moreover, we validate the claim that lower Transformer layers carry more type-level lexical knowledge, but also show that this knowledge is distributed across multiple layers.

Current methods of cross-lingual parser transfer focus on predicting the best parser for a low-resource target language globally, that is, “at treebank level”. In this work, we propose and argue for a novel cross-lingual transfer paradigm: instance-level parser selection (ILPS), and present a proof-of-concept study focused on instance-level selection in the framework of delexicalized parser transfer. Our work is motivated by an empirical observation that different source parsers are the best choice for different Universal POS-sequences (i.e., UPOS sentences) in the target language. We then propose to predict the best parser at the instance level. To this end, we train a supervised regression model, based on the Transformer architecture, to predict parser accuracies for individual POS-sequences. We compare ILPS against two strong single-best parser selection baselines (SBPS): (1) a model that compares POS n-gram distributions between the source and target languages (KL) and (2) a model that selects the source based on the similarity between manually created language vectors encoding syntactic properties of languages (L2V). The results from our extensive evaluation, coupling 42 source parsers and 20 diverse low-resource test languages, show that ILPS outperforms KL and L2V on 13/20 and 14/20 test languages, respectively. Further, we show that by predicting the best parser “at treebank level” (SBPS), using the aggregation of predictions from our instance-level model, we outperform the same baselines on 17/20 and 16/20 test languages.

Cross-lingual word embeddings (CLEs) facilitate cross-lingual transfer of NLP models. Despite their ubiquitous downstream usage, increasingly popular projection-based CLE models are almost exclusively evaluated on bilingual lexicon induction (BLI). Even the BLI evaluations vary greatly, hindering our ability to correctly interpret performance and properties of different CLE models. In this work, we take the first step towards a comprehensive evaluation of CLE models: we thoroughly evaluate both supervised and unsupervised CLE models, for a large number of language pairs, on BLI and three downstream tasks, providing new insights concerning the ability of cutting-edge CLE models to support cross-lingual NLP. We empirically demonstrate that the performance of CLE models largely depends on the task at hand and that optimizing CLE models for BLI may hurt downstream performance. We indicate the most robust supervised and unsupervised CLE models and emphasize the need to reassess simple baselines, which still display competitive performance across the board. We hope our work catalyzes further research on CLE evaluation and model analysis.