Previous work on Egyptian Arabic in NLP has focused largely on the prestigious Cairene Egyptian Arabic (CEA) dialect, resulting in a lack of representation for the less prestigious Sa’idi Egyptian Arabic (SEA) dialect both in LLM and resource development. Does this lack of representation influence an LLM’s view of the acceptability of SEA (upstream), and does an upstream bias against SEA lead to worse performance (downstream)? We investigate the upstream effect of SEA dialectal features on LLM preferences in a Targeted Syntactic Evaluation (TSE) task which reveals a significant bias against SEA across multiple LLMs. We then analyze the effect of these same features on downstream model performance on MMLU benchmarks and show that models frequently experience a degradation in performance when presented with SEA. This work highlights the need for further exploration on how sub-dialectal variation impacts language technologies.

Egyptian Arabic (EA) NLP resources have mainly focused on Cairene Egyptian Arabic (CEA), leaving sub-dialects like Sa’idi Egyptian Arabic (SEA) underrepresented. This paper introduces the first SEA corpus – an open-source, 4-million-word literary dataset of a dialect spoken by ~30 million Egyptians. To validate its representation, we analyze SEA-specific linguistic features from dialectal surveys, confirming a higher prevalence in our corpus compared to existing EA datasets. Our findings offer insights into SEA’s orthographic representation in morphology, phonology, and lexicon, incorporating CODA* guidelines for normalization.

This paper investigates false positive constructions: grammatical structures which an LLM hallucinates as distinct constructions but which human introspection does not support. Both a behavioural probing task using contextual embeddings and a meta-linguistic probing task using prompts are included, allowing us to distinguish between implicit and explicit linguistic knowledge. Both methods reveal that models do indeed hallucinate constructions. We then simulate hypothesis testing to determine what would have happened if a linguist had falsely hypothesized that these hallucinated constructions do exist. The high accuracy obtained shows that such false hypotheses would have been overwhelmingly confirmed. This suggests that construction probing methods suffer from a confirmation bias and raises the issue of what unknown and incorrect syntactic knowledge these models also possess.

How well does naturally-occurring digital text, such as Tweets, represent sub-dialects of Egyptian Arabic (EA)? This paper focuses on two EA sub-dialects: Cairene Egyptian Arabic (CEA) and Sa’idi Egyptian Arabic (SEA). We use morphological markers from ground-truth dialect surveys as a distance measure across four geo-referenced datasets. Results show that CEA markers are prevalent as expected in CEA geo-referenced tweets, while SEA markers are limited across SEA geo-referenced tweets. SEA tweets instead show a prevalence of CEA markers and higher usage of Modern Standard Arabic. We conclude that corpora intended to represent sub-dialects of EA do not accurately represent sub-dialects outside of the Cairene variety. This finding calls into question the validity of relying on tweets alone to represent dialectal differences.