Papers › One Script Instead of Hundreds? On Pretraining Romanized Encoder Language Models

One Script Instead of Hundreds? On Pretraining Romanized Encoder Language Models

9 Jan 2026arXiv:2601.05776added by Syntology

Benedikt Ebing, Lennart Keller, Goran Glavaš

Title, abstract, authors and date from arXiv's metadata (CC0); this paper is not in the Papers with Code archive (frozen 2025-07-28).

Exposing latent lexical overlap, script romanization has emerged as an effective strategy for improving cross-lingual transfer (XLT) in multilingual language models (mLMs). Most prior work, however, focused on setups that favor romanization the most: (1) transfer from high-resource Latin-script to low-resource non-Latin-script languages and/or (2) between genealogically closely related languages with different scripts. It thus remains unclear whether romanization is a good representation choice for pretraining general-purpose mLMs, or, more precisely, if information loss associated with romanization harms performance for high-resource languages. We address this gap by pretraining encoder LMs from scratch on both romanized and original texts for six typologically diverse high-resource languages, investigating two potential sources of degradation: (i) loss of script-specific information and (ii) negative cross-lingual interference from increased vocabulary overlap. Using two romanizers with different fidelity profiles, we observe negligible performance loss for languages with segmental scripts, whereas languages with morphosyllabic scripts (Chinese and Japanese) suffer degradation that higher-fidelity romanization mitigates but cannot fully recover. Importantly, comparing monolingual LMs with their mLM counterpart, we find no evidence that increased subword overlap induces negative interference. We further show that romanization improves encoding efficiency (i.e., fertility) for segmental scripts at a negligible performance cost.

Code

Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.

Code Syntology ran Syntology

14 samples harvested; 0 ran; 0 honoured the contract we drafted; 14 have no recorded run. Read from Syntology's graph 2026-09-24; that is when this build read the record, not when the samples ran.

Licence: 0 of the 14 samples are pointer only, meaning Syntology does not serve that copy's text. This page shows no code text for any sample; each one links to its file in the repository.

Harvested from AnswerDotAI/ModernBERT. “Ran” means the sample executed on a synthesized input. It does not mean the output is correct, and nothing here reproduces the paper's results. “Honoured” and “violated” refer to a contract Syntology drafted from the code itself; “our draft was wrong” and “fixture could not drive it” are failures of Syntology's instrument, not of the code.

Each sample ends with its code_sha256, Syntology's identity for that exact code. An agent fetches the stored sample with Syntology's MCP tool get_code(code_sha256="…") (how to connect); click an identity to copy that call.

Repository labels, per sample. official repository: The archive marks this repository official for the paper. named in the paper: The archive records that the paper mentions this repository; it is not marked official. community (archive-listed): In the archive's code links for this paper, not marked official and not recorded as mentioned in the paper. found in paper text by Syntology: Syntology found this repository in the paper's own text; whether it is the authors' implementation is not asserted. community: Not in the archive's code links for this paper; a community repository Syntology harvested. Samples from a repository marked official are listed first. Licence labels name the repository's licence as recorded at harvest. “Pointer only” means Syntology does not serve that copy's text, for one of four reasons: no licence file was found; the licence was not identified; the licence is recorded as permissive but that copy's record is not marked cleared; or the licence is outside the permissive list Syntology serves text under (MIT, Apache-2.0, BSD and similar). Some licences outside that list permit redistribution, such as WTFPL, and GPL-3.0 under its conditions; they are simply not on the list. Hover a licence label for the reason. File links open the file on GitHub at the default branch, which may have changed since the harvest.

Results from the paper

The Papers with Code archive ends with its 2025-07-28 snapshot. This paper's arXiv identifier, 2601.05776, was issued in January 2026, after that date, so the archive has no leaderboard rows for it.

Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections