mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Cultural Fidelity in English-to-Hindi Translation: A Preservation-Fluency Frontier for Gender Recoverability

arXiv 2605.27654 ↗First posted 26 May 2026cs.CL cs.AI cs.CYcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Generative translation systems are cultural technologies because they decide how socially meaningful cues are rendered within culturally specific grammatical systems. We study one concrete notion of successful cultural translation: when an English source explicitly encodes gender, an English-to-Hindi translation should preserve the recoverability of that cue unless the source itself is ambiguous. We evaluate this criterion on a 37,345-instance benchmark spanning twelve categories and show that five systems frequently erase gender through ergative and honorific constructions. We then introduce two mechanism-aware inference-time interventions. The first, the Source-Aware Reranker (SAR), prefers candidates that avoid gender-neutralizing syntax. The second, the Phenomenon-Aware Reranker (PAR), preserves gender through targeted lexical marking even when ergative syntax remains. Across GPT-4o-mini and Sarvam, PAR improves target-subset accuracy from 11.07% to 54.47% and from 15.99% to 49.66%, respectively. Human evaluation shows that PAR increases gender preservation from 10.3% to 81.3%, but reduces mean fluency from 4.36 to 3.37. These findings place the two interventions on a preservation and fluency frontier rather than supporting a single dominant solution, and show how culturally situated generation can require explicit tradeoffs among fidelity, fluency, and stylistic naturalness.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 20 of its 23 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 26 May 2026.

Builds on

20 of 23 references.

References · 20

  1. 2022No Language Left Behind: Scaling Human-Centered Machine Translationcited by 1,312
  2. 2018Gender Bias in Coreference Resolution: Evaluation and Debiasing Methodscited by 659
  3. 2019Evaluating Gender Bias in Machine Translationcited by 249
  4. 2023IndicTrans2: Towards High-Quality and Accessible Machine Translation Models for all 22 Scheduled Indian Languagescited by 152
  5. 2021Gender Bias in Machine Translationcited by 117
  6. 2019Getting Gender Right in Neural Machine Translationcited by 98
  7. 2023Benchmarking Machine Translation with Cultural Awarenesscited by 53
  8. 2020Mitigating Gender Bias in Machine Translation with Target Gender Annotationscited by 42
  9. 2020Neural Machine Translation Doesn't Translate Gender Coreference Right Unless You Make Itcited by 40
  10. 2022MT-GenEval: A Counterfactual and Contextual Dataset for Evaluating Gender Accuracy in Machine Translationcited by 38
  11. 2021First the worst: Finding better gender translations during beam searchcited by 29
  12. 2019Filling Gender & Number Gaps in Neural Machine Translation with Black-box Context Injectioncited by 27
8 more
  1. 2021Evaluating Gender Bias in Hindi-English Machine Translationcited by 19
  2. 2023A Tale of Pronouns: Interpretability Informs Gender Bias Mitigation for Fairer Instruction-Tuned Machine Translationcited by 19
  3. 2024Akal Badi ya Bias: An Exploratory Study of Gender Bias in Hindi Language Technologycited by 17
  4. 2024Translating Across Cultures: LLMs for Intralingual Cultural Adaptationcited by 16
  5. 2024The power of Prompts: Evaluating and Mitigating Gender Bias in MT with LLMscited by 12
  6. 2022Mitigating Gender Stereotypes in Hindi and Marathicited by 6
  7. 2024MiTTenS: A Dataset for Evaluating Gender Mistranslationcited by 5
  8. 2023Gender Inflected or Bias Inflicted: On Using Grammatical Gender Cues for Bias Evaluation in Machine Translationcited by 4

Built on by

Not cited yet.