Human knowledge is collectively encoded in the roughly 6500 languages spoken around the world, but it is not distributed equally across languages. Hence, for information-seeking question answering (QA) systems to adequately serve speakers of all lang
uages, they need to operate cross-lingually. In this work we investigate the capabilities of multilingually pretrained language models on cross-lingual QA. We find that explicitly aligning the representations across languages with a post-hoc finetuning step generally leads to improved performance. We additionally investigate the effect of data size as well as the language choice in this fine-tuning step, also releasing a dataset for evaluating cross-lingual QA systems.
Task-agnostic pretraining objectives like masked language models or corrupted span prediction are applicable to a wide range of NLP downstream tasks (Raffel et al.,2019), but are outperformed by task-specific pretraining objectives like predicting ex
tracted gap sentences on summarization (Zhang et al.,2020). We compare three summarization specific pretraining objectives with the task agnostic corrupted span prediction pretraining in controlled study. We also extend our study to a low resource and zero shot setup, to understand how many training examples are needed in order to ablate the task-specific pretraining without quality loss. Our results show that task-agnostic pretraining is sufficient for most cases which hopefully reduces the need for costly task-specific pretraining. We also report new state-of-the-art number for two summarization task using a T5 model with 11 billion parameters and an optimal beam search length penalty.
This paper tries to examine the relationship between analogy and the grammatical
rule. Analogy is one of the basic principles and bases of Arabic grammar during times of
rule formation and judging it. Linguists were divided in their attitude to ana
logy, with
some supporting it and others against it. Grammarians were more inclined toward analogy
than compilers, because grammarians’ research was based on the existing similarity
between words, phrases, and style used in speech reported by tellers of what had been said
by the Arabs. They based their rules and origins of analogy on that similarity. Analogists
transliterated some foreign terms, Arabized, and derived new words out of them in a
manner similar to that done with Arabic terms. However, some grammarians went very far
in their excessive use of analogy to the extent that it becomes far removed from linguistic
reality to be a form riddle and guessing, leading to reaction against analogy then against
grammar. Analogy became an end in itself; it overlooked its original purpose; was then
manifested in rule formation of words said spontaneously.
لعل من أهم الأسباب التي دفعت المولدين لوضع الأشعار و دسها على الأئمة
نصرة رأي ذهب إليه، أو توجيه كلمة ما.
و قد جاء العلماء فاحتجوا ببعض هذه الأشعار ظنًا منهم أنها للعرب.
فإلى أي مدى احتج بعض النحاة بالشاهد المصنوع، و ما أثر ذلك في الانتصار
لرأي م
عين، أو دحض آخر لضعف في الشاهد.
و قد عالج البحث بعض الشواهد المصنوعة، وتناولها من جهتين. الأولى الأبيات
التي يمكن الاحتجاج بها، و الثانية الأبيات التي أسقط العلماء الاحتجاج بها.
