Modal Sense Disambiguation in Language Models: The Role of Context, Training Domain, and Input Frequency

arXiv:2610.25816 · cs.CL · Submitted 2026-10-19 · Read on arXiv

cs.CL

Submitted: 2026-10-19

Updated: 2026-10-19

License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

The gist: Modals such as may and must can take on different senses depending on discourse context, alternating between root interpretations (e.g., permission, obligation) and epistemic interpretations (e.g.,

Abstract

Modals such as may and must can take on different senses depending on discourse context, alternating between root interpretations (e.g., permission, obligation) and epistemic interpretations (e.g., knowledge, belief). While modals are known to be notoriously difficult for children to acquire, limited research exists on whether language models (LMs) can reliably distinguish between different modal senses. We evaluate seven LMs that vary in architecture, size, and training data type using vector-based similarity and surprisal measures across four datasets. Specifically, we investigate whether LMs can leverage contextual information to disambiguate modal senses and whether their performance reflects the distribution of modal senses in their training data. We show that larger LMs trained on diverse text successfully leverage additional contextual information when available. In the absence of context, they tend to favor the dominant sense based on corpus statistics. Smaller developmentally plausible LMs, including those trained on child-directed language (CDL), fail to show consistent sensitivity to modal sense distinctions and do not benefit from context to the same degree.

Related papers