mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Translating the Unseen? Yoruba-English MT in Low-Resource, Morphologically-Unmarked Settings

arXiv 2103.04225 ↗First posted 7 Mar 2021cs.CL cs.AI cs.LGcited by 5

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Translating between languages where certain features are marked morphologically in one but absent or marked contextually in the other is an important test case for machine translation. When translating into English which marks (in)definiteness morphologically, from Yor`ub'a which uses bare nouns but marks these features contextually, ambiguities arise. In this work, we perform fine-grained analysis on how an SMT system compares with two NMT systems (BiLSTM and Transformer) when translating bare nouns in Yor`ub'a into English. We investigate how the systems what extent they identify BNs, correctly translate them, and compare with human translation patterns. We also analyze the type of errors each model makes and provide a linguistic description of these errors. We glean insights for evaluating model performance in low-resource settings. In translating bare nouns, our results show the transformer model outperforms the SMT and BiLSTM models for 4 categories, the BiLSTM outperforms the SMT model for 3 categories while the SMT outperforms the NMT models for 1 category.

Key facts. Cited by 5 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 19 of its 44 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 7 Mar 2021.

Builds on

19 of 44 references.

References · 19

  1. 2015Neural Machine Translation of Rare Words with Subword Unitscited by 2,898
  2. 2018A Call for Clarity in Reporting BLEU Scorescited by 1,790
  3. 2017Word Translation Without Parallel Datacited by 480
  4. 2016Assessing the Ability of LSTMs to Learn Syntax-Sensitive Dependenciescited by 350
  5. 2019Learning Deep Transformer Models for Machine Translationcited by 309
  6. 2017Unsupervised Machine Translation Using Monolingual Corpora Onlycited by 272
  7. 2018Context-Aware Neural Machine Translation Learns Anaphora Resolutioncited by 97
  8. 2017Evaluating Discourse Phenomena in Neural Machine Translationcited by 87
  9. 2019Revisiting Low-Resource Neural Machine Translation: A Case Studycited by 61
  10. 2017Transfer Learning across Low-Resource, Related Languages for Neural Machine Translationcited by 58
  11. 2019Lost in Translation: Loss and Decay of Linguistic Richness in Machine Translationcited by 45
  12. 2016How Grammatical is Character-level Neural Machine Translation? Assessing MT Quality with Contrastive Translation Pairscited by 39
7 more
  1. 2017A Challenge Set Approach to Evaluating Machine Translationcited by 37
  2. 2016Neural versus Phrase-Based Machine Translation Quality: a Case Studycited by 19
  3. 2017A Multifaceted Evaluation of Neural versus Phrase-Based Machine Translation for 9 Language Directionscited by 10
  4. 2016Is Neural Machine Translation Ready for Deployment? A Case Study on 30 Translation Directionscited by 7
  5. 2017Deep Architectures for Neural Machine Translationcited by 5
  6. 2019Findings of the 2016 WMT Shared Task on Cross-lingual Pronoun Predictioncited by 5
  7. 2017Fine-grained human evaluation of neural versus phrase-based machine translationcited by 2

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2021: 3; 2022: 0; 2023: 0; 2024: 1; 2025: 1.

5 papers.