The study traces this dialect tax across the natural language processing pipeline, suggesting that the dialect tax is encoded and accumulated not by any one step in isolation, but at every step of the language modeling process.
Abstract
Systematic dialectal performance gaps in language models (LMs) are well documented, but the source of these disparities within the modern language modeling pipeline remains unclear. Our study traces this"dialect tax"across the natural language processing pipeline. Using parallel English dialect corpora that hold meaning fixed while varying surface form, we first confirm that LMs recognize matched Standard American English (SAE) and dialectal texts as semantically equivalent. However, we discover further representational gaps corresponding to downstream performance gaps. Across model families and generations, modern LMs still encode dialectal texts unequally during tokenization, pre-training, post-training, and inference. Strikingly, bypassing traditional subword segmentation via a character-level counterfactual tokenizer removes neither input and output asymmetries nor dialectal accuracy gaps. During pre-training, dialect pairs induce more divergent gradient updates than pairs of entirely unrelated SAE documents, indicating that models find semantically equivalent dialectal content harder to learn from than unrelated SAE documents. During post-training, reward models show contextual, unstable dialect preferences, assigning higher values to isolated AAVE-exclusive tokens than to SAE-exclusive tokens, while full reasoning contexts receive task- and model-dependent dialect penalties. Overall, our findings suggest that the dialect tax is encoded and accumulated not by any one step in isolation, but at every step of the language modeling process.
Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed in high-stakes domains such as housing screening. While alignment techniques mitigate explicit racial bias in generated text, they often leave covert attitudinal associations in internal probability distributions untouched. Adapting the matched-guise sociolinguisti...
Chowdhury Mohammad Abdullah, Rita Orji· Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM...· 0 citations
Recent work suggests that obscure language registers can weaken large language model refusal behavior, especially when paired with black-box prompt optimization. It remains unclear whether failures stem from non-standard surface form, culturally grounded framing, or optimization over an expressive prompt-strategy space...
This paper aims to rebut a social cognitive prejudice that dialect-speaking learners face greater difficulties in acquiring English pronunciation than Mandarin-speaking learners. To correct such misconceptions, the paper introduces several theories, which collectively prove that pronunciation acquisition only generates...
Han-Wen Zhang· Journal of Language, Culture...· 0 citations
It is found that tokenizer choice matters more for languages with less language-model training data: across the 54 tokenizers, the standard deviation of a language's bits-per-byte (BPB) increases as its model training-data share decreases.
Clara Meister, G. S. Altintas, Antoine Bosselut· 0 citations
Claims about the grammatical competence of multilingual language models vary sharply with how competence is measured, yet the interaction between evaluation paradigm, post-training, and language resource availability has not been systematically examined. We evaluate base and post-trained models from six families on Mul...
Multilingual large language models (LLMs) are widely assumed to behave consistently regardless of the language in which a prompt is expressed. We challenge this assumption through a controlled empirical study in which language itself is isolated as the sole independent variable. We present 30 semantically equivalent pr...
Aman Chandra H, Sameer Kulkarni, S. Nithin et al.· 2026 International Conferenc...· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.