How Do Language Models Represent and Use Phonological Information for Allomorph Selection?
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Language models are trained on tokenized text that obscures the sound structure of words, yet they reliably produce morphemes whose form is phonologically conditioned. It remains unclear whether they rely on item-specific memorization or rule-like generalization and, if the latter, how that generalization is implemented. We therefore ask whether this phonological condition is represented within language models and how it is causally used for allomorph selection. For the English indefinite article a/an, we show that the phonological condition is encoded along a single linear direction in trigger-token embeddings, that this direction causally drives article selection in token-level wug tests, and that, at the article-prediction position, the model forecasts the upcoming trigger token and uses the forecasted trigger's phonological feature to choose the article. We then ask whether this rule-like generalization extends beyond English article selection, both to allomorph selection in other languages and to explicit phonological judgment. Together, these results provide a mechanistic account of phonologically conditioned allomorph selection in language models, and dissociate this generation-time ability from explicit metalinguistic judgments.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 19 of its 39 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 4 Sep 2026.
Builds on
19 of 39 references.
References · 19
- 2018BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understandingcited by 40,204
- 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,199
- 2024The Llama 3 Herd of Modelscited by 14,192
- 2021On the Opportunities and Risks of Foundation Modelscited by 3,961
- 2023The Geometry of Truth: Emergent Linear Structure in Large Language Model Representations of True/False Datasetscited by 673
- 2021ByT5: Towards a token-free future with pre-trained byte-to-byte modelscited by 504
- 2020Null It Out: Guarding Protected Attributes by Iterative Nullspace Projectioncited by 442
- 2021CANINE: Pre-training an Efficient Tokenization-Free Encoder for Language Representationcited by 229
- 2020Byte Pair Encoding is Suboptimal for Language Model Pretrainingcited by 189
- 2024Byte Latent Transformer: Patches Scale Better Than Tokenscited by 137
- 2023Future Lens: Anticipating Subsequent Tokens from a Single Hidden Statecited by 116
- 2022What do tokens know about their characters and how do they know it?cited by 36
7 more
- 2024CUTE: Measuring LLMs' Understanding of Their Tokenscited by 28
- 2021Models In a Spelling Bee: Language Models Implicitly Learn the Character Composition of Tokenscited by 26
- 2025EXAONE 4.0: Unified Large Language Models Integrating Non-reasoning and Reasoning Modescited by 26
- 2024Prompting open-source and commercial language models for grammatical error correction of English learner textcited by 24
- 2023Enhancing Cross-lingual Transfer via Phonemic Transcription Integrationcited by 11
- 2025The Lucie-7B LLM and the Lucie Training Dataset: Open resources for multilingual language generationcited by 9
- 2025EXECUTE: A Multilingual Benchmark for LLM Token Understandingcited by 4
Built on by
Not cited yet.