# Is Cross-Lingual Transfer in Bilingual Models Human-Like? A Study with Overlapping Word Forms in Dutch and English

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2604.07067 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2604.07067/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 13 of its 43 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 8 Apr 2026.

## Builds on (most cited first, 13 of 13)

- [Unsupervised Cross-lingual Representation Learning at Scale](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1911.02116/) (2019)
- [How Contextual are Contextualized Word Representations? Comparing the Geometry of BERT, ELMo, and GPT-2 Embeddings](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1909.00512/) (2019)
- [How multilingual is Multilingual BERT?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1906.01502/) (2019)
- [WiC: the Word-in-Context Dataset for Evaluating Context-Sensitive Meaning Representations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1808.09121/) (2018)
- [Beto, Bentz, Becas: The Surprising Cross-Lingual Effectiveness of BERT](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1904.09077/) (2019)
- [Cross-Lingual Ability of Multilingual BERT: An Empirical Study](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1912.07840/) (2019)
- [All Bark and No Bite: Rogue Dimensions in Transformer Language Models Obscure Representational Quality](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2109.04404/) (2021)
- [What Artificial Neural Networks Can Tell Us About Human Language Acquisition](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2208.07998/) (2022)
- [XL-WiC: A Multilingual Benchmark for Evaluating Semantic Contextualization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2010.06478/) (2020)
- [Large Language Models Are Human-Like Internally](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.01615/) (2025)
- [Causal Estimation of Tokenisation Bias](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.03149/) (2025)
- [Entropy- and Distance-Based Predictors From GPT-2 Attention Patterns Predict Reading Times Over and Above GPT-2 Surprisal](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2212.11185/) (2022)
- [Second Language Acquisition of Neural Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.02920/) (2023)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Bilingual speakers show cross-lingual activation during reading, especially for words with shared surface form. Cognates (friends) typically lead to facilitation, whereas interlingual homographs (false friends) cause interference or no effect. We examine whether cross-lingual activation in bilingual language models mirrors these patterns. We train Dutch-English causal Transformers under four vocabulary-sharing conditions that manipulate whether (false) friends receive shared or language-specific embeddings. Using psycholinguistic stimuli from bilingual reading studies, we evaluate the models through surprisal and embedding similarity analyses. The models largely maintain language separation, and cross-lingual effects arise primarily when embeddings are shared. In these cases, both friends and false friends show facilitation relative to controls. Regression analyses reveal that these effects are mainly driven by frequency rather than consistency in form-meaning mapping. Only when just friends share embeddings are the qualitative patterns of bilinguals reproduced. Overall, bilingual language models capture some cross-linguistic activation effects. However, their alignment with human processing seems to critically depend on how lexical overlap is encoded, possibly limiting their explanatory adequacy as models of bilingual reading.