Assessing BERT's Syntactic Abilities
Open accessAbstract
I assess the extent to which the recently introduced BERT model captures English syntactic phenomena, using (1) naturally-occurring subject-verb agreement stimuli; (2) "coloreless green ideas" subject-verb agreement stimuli, in which content words in natural sentences are randomly replaced with words sharing the same part-of-speech and inflection; and (3) manually crafted stimuli for subject-verb agreement and reflexive anaphora phenomena. The BERT model performs remarkably well on all cases.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
LLMs are first trained on large corpora of data and derive internal representations of linguistic rules and patterns that form the foundation for fine-tuning on downstream tasks.
“These models are first trained on large corpora of data such as articles, books, and websites—requiring unprecedented volumes of training data (Bender et al., 2021). The large amount of text in their training datasets allows LLMs to derive internal representations of various linguistic rules and patterns that form the foundation on which LLMs are then fine-tuned to perform other downstream tasks,”
From Helpful, harmless, honest? Sociotechnical limits of AI alignment and safety through Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (2025) · cites this paper as Goldberg, 2019
The Results (p. 3) and Discussion (p. 4) indicate that pretrained BERT captures syntactic regularities, supporting the claim that a model can learn linguistic patterns from training text. The paper does not establish that those patterns form the foundation for downstream fine-tuning; the Introduction (p. 1) says its syntactic tests used models without task-specific fine-tuning. (LLM, conf=0.86)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 6 · Cited by 385
Research works printed but not linked: 5
- Tal Linzen, Emmanuel Dupoux, and Yoav Goldberg. 2016. Assessing the ability of LSTMs to learn syntax-sensitive dependenci Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics , 4:521-535.
- Gongbo Tang, Mathias Mller, Annette Rios, and Rico Sennrich. 2018. Why self-attention? a targeted evaluation of neural machine translati In Proceedings of the 2018 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing , pages 4263-4272.
- Ke Tran, Arianna Bisazza, and Christof Monz. 2018. The importance of being recurrent for modeling hierarchical structur In Proceedings of the 2018 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing , pages 4731-4736.
- Kristina Gulordava, Piotr Bojanowski, Edouard Grave, Tal Linzen, and Marco Baroni. 2018. Colorless green recurrent networks dream hierarchically. In Proceedings of the 2018 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics NAACL-HLT , pages 1195-1205.
- Ashish Vaswani, Noam Shazeer, Niki Parmar, Jakob Uszkoreit, Llion Jones, Aidan N Gomez, Ł ukasz Kaiser, and Illia Polosukhin. 2017. Attention is all you need. In I. Guyon, U. V. Luxburg, S. Bengio, H. Wallach, R. Fergus, S. Vishwanathan, and R. Garnett, editors, Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 30 , pages 59986008.
- Authors
- Goldberg, Y.
- Affiliations
- Bar-Ilan University (IL)
- Corresponding author
- Goldberg, Yoav
- ORCID
- Goldberg, Yoav
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2019
- ISSN
- 2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 1901.05287
- OpenAlex
- W2910243263
- Cited by
- 385
- References
- 6
- Citations by year
- 2025: 6 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 48 · 2022: 47 · 2021: 108 · 2020: 116 · 2019: 45
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Locations
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Natural Language Processing Techniques
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › Syntax, Semantics, Linguistic Variation
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
- Keywords
- BERT, syntactic analysis, subject-verb agreement, English syntax, pre-trained language models, syntactic ambiguity, parts of speech
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
