Explain-then-Process: Using Grammar Prompting to Enhance Grammatical Acceptability Judgments
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Large language models (LLMs) can explain grammatical rules, yet they often fail to apply those rules when judging sentence acceptability. We present "grammar prompting", an explain-then-process paradigm: a large LLM first produces a concise explanation of the relevant syntactic phenomenon, then that explanation is fed back as additional context to the target model -- either an LLM or a smaller language model (SLM) -- before deciding which sentence of a minimal pair is grammatical. On the English BLiMP, Chinese SLING, and Russian RuBLiMP benchmarks, this simple prompt design yields substantial improvements over strong baselines across many syntactic phenomena. Feeding an LLM's metalinguistic explanation back to the target model bridges the gap between knowing a rule and using it. On SLMs, grammar prompting alone trims the average LLM-SLM accuracy gap by about 20%, and when paired with chain-of-thought, by 56% (13.0 pp -> 5.8 pp), all at negligible cost. The lightweight, language-agnostic cue lets low-cost SLMs approach frontier-LLM performance in multilingual settings.
Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 9 of its 20 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 2 Jun 2025.
Builds on
9 of 20 references.
References · 9
- 2018Neural Network Acceptability Judgmentscited by 958
- 2019BLiMP: The Benchmark of Linguistic Minimal Pairs for Englishcited by 564
- 2022Can language models learn from explanations in context?cited by 249
- 2023The Learnability of In-Context Learningcited by 127
- 2023A Benchmark for Learning to Translate a New Language from One Grammar Bookcited by 75
- 2024RuBLiMP: Russian Benchmark of Linguistic Minimal Pairscited by 24
- 2024Can LLMs Really Learn to Translate a Low-Resource Language from One Grammar Book?cited by 23
- 2022SLING: Sino Linguistic Evaluation of Large Language Modelscited by 15
- 2024Grammaticality Representation in ChatGPT as Compared to Linguists and Laypeoplecited by 5
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 2.
2 papers.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2026IndicIFEval: A Benchmark for Verifiable Instruction-Following Evaluation in 14 Indic Languages
- 2024Inductive Linguistic Reasoning with Large Language Models
- 2025Large Language Model probabilities cannot distinguish between possible and impossible language
- 2023Metacognitive Prompting Improves Understanding in Large Language Models
- 2023Simple Linguistic Inferences of Large Language Models (LLMs): Blind Spots and Blinds
- 2022The Unreliability of Explanations in Few-shot Prompting for Textual Reasoning
- 2025Cross-Lingual Prompt Steerability: Towards Accurate and Robust LLM Behavior across Languages
- 2025Position: On the Methodological Pitfalls of Evaluating Base LLMs for Reasoning