Resources / NLP Samples

Explore real Bitext language samples and specifications

Use this resource page to inspect actual Bitext sample files and language specification documents. The goal is not to explain the pipeline again, but to give technical buyers direct access to the linguistic evidence behind it.

Data samples
Language specifications
Morphological attributes
Named entities
Technical PDFs

A technical resource, not another marketing page

Download samples. Read language specs. Validate the resource depth.

Each language card links to a sample data file and a language specification PDF. These documents show the kind of lexical, morphological, frequency, named entity and offensive-language information available in Bitext language resources.

9
sample languages

2
links per language

Sample library

Download sample data and language specifications

Use the XLSX sample files to inspect data structure. Use the PDF specifications to understand the feature sets available for each language.

Kazakh

Specification includes inflectional, derivational and extended forms, named entities, frequency and offensive-language flags.

Armenian

Specification includes POS, lemma, tense-mood, person, number, case, definiteness, degree and named entities.

Slovak

Specification includes perfective, tense, person, number, gender, case, degree, negative and entity-type information.

Mongolian

Specification includes tense-mood, aspect, polarity, person, number, case, degree and reflexiveness.

Russian

Use the sample and specification documents to inspect Russian lexical and morphological resource structure.

Portuguese

Specification includes tense, mood, person, number, gender, named entities and Brazilian Portuguese regional variant data.

Malayalam

Specification includes affirmative, tense, mood, person, gender, number, case, formality and named entity information.

Urdu

Specification includes tense, mood, gender, number, person, case, possessive attributes and named entities.

Catalan

Specification includes tense, mood, person, number, gender, derivational forms and common compound words.

What to look for

The technical signals inside the samples

The sample files and specifications show the linguistic features that matter when Bitext is used as infrastructure for search, RAG, entity extraction, document intelligence and multilingual AI.

Lemma and form

Canonical forms and surface forms used for normalization and matching

POS and morphology

Part of speech plus attributes such as tense, mood, person, number, gender and case

Named entities

Entity-type signals for names, places, companies and organizations

Frequency

Relative frequency information from representative language corpora

Offensive flag

Information indicating whether a form may be offensive in specific contexts

Language-specific phenomena

Clitics, compounds, postposition suffixes, regional variants and other language-specific details

Technical documents

Use these documents for deeper evaluation

The sample library is useful for language-specific inspection. These two documents give buyers the broader technical proof: complete NLP service coverage and detailed lexical resource structure.

NLP Matrix

Service-by-service coverage across Bitext languages and variants.

Download PDF

Lexical Data Resources

Detailed reference for Bitext lexical data resources, morphological features, frequency data, named entities and language-specific attributes.

Download PDF

Need help interpreting the samples?

Tell us which languages, services and workflows you want to evaluate. We will help map the sample files and technical specifications to your AI, search or document pipeline.

The Hidden Signal in Millions of News Articles That Reveals How Global Narratives Form

The Experiment
We tested this idea using the Leipzig English News corpora from the Wortschatz Project at Leipzig University. We analyzed datasets from 2023, 2024 and 2025.

Across these datasets, the pipeline processed roughly:

2 million raw news articles
400K articles after topical filtering
From these documents the pipeline extracted:

millions of entity mentions
tens of millions of co-mention relationships
To focus on economic and technology narratives, documents were filtered using the IPTC Media Topics taxonomy, keeping only:

Economy, Business and Finance
Science and Technology

Why LLMs Are the Wrong Tool for Enterprise-Grade Entity Extraction

Large Language Models are powerful systems for language generation and reasoning.
However, when they are used for entity extraction in enterprise environments, they introduce instability where reliability is required.
Entity extraction is not about creativity or interpretation. It is infrastructure. In production systems, entities must be extracted in a way that is consistent, repeatable, and stable over time.

Tagging consistency is essential to ensure that training is smooth. Contradictions and inconsistencies not only decrease accuracy but also generate hidden costs in MLOps when trying to debug and fix errors. We often take this consistency for granted, but that is rarely the case, not only in these datasets but also in any other manual tagging work.

Consistency starts with having a solid and clear definition of what an entity is. Typically, if not always, that’s not the case.

And knowledge graphs are built using automatic data extraction tools: not only entity extraction but also concept extraction and relationships among entities or concepts.

German & Korean Retrieval Fails Without Proper Decompounding

German and Korean do not break retrieval because they are unusually complex; they break retrieval because most systems still treat complex words as monolithic strings. When compounds and eojeols remain opaque, search engines cannot align queries with documents—even when they contain the same meaning. Any team building multilingual search, vector search or RAG must incorporate reliable decompounding as a foundational step to avoid systematic retrieval failures.

Tagging consistency is essential to ensure that training is smooth. Contradictions and inconsistencies not only decrease accuracy but also generate hidden costs in MLOps when trying to debug and fix errors. We often take this consistency for granted, but that is rarely the case, not only in these datasets but also in any other manual tagging work.

Consistency starts with having a solid and clear definition of what an entity is. Typically, if not always, that’s not the case.

And knowledge graphs are built using automatic data extraction tools: not only entity extraction but also concept extraction and relationships among entities or concepts.

The Moment to Pay Attention to Hybrid NLP (Symbolic + ML)

Problem. There’s broad consensus today: LLMs are phenomenal personal productivity tools — they draft, summarize, and assist effortlessly.
But there’s also growing recognition that they’re still not ready for enterprise-grade deployment.

Using Public Corpora to Build Your NER systems

Rationale. NER tools are at the heart of how the scientific community is solving LLM issues using GraphRAG and NodeRAG architectures.

LLMs need knowledge graphs to control hallucinations and make them more solid for enterprise-level use.

And knowledge graphs are built using automatic data extraction tools: not only entity extraction but also concept extraction and relationships among entities or concepts.

Open-Source Data and Training Issues

As described in our previous post “Using Public Corpora to Build Your NER systems”, we are going to highlight areas where public datasets like OntoNotes or CoNLL can be improved. We will provide some tips on how to avoid these issues, whenever possible, using (semi-)automatic techniques.

Tagging consistency is essential to ensure that training is smooth. Contradictions and inconsistencies not only decrease accuracy but also generate hidden costs in MLOps when trying to debug and fix errors. We often take this consistency for granted, but that is rarely the case, not only in these datasets but also in any other manual tagging work.

Consistency starts with having a solid and clear definition of what an entity is. Typically, if not always, that’s not the case.

And knowledge graphs are built using automatic data extraction tools: not only entity extraction but also concept extraction and relationships among entities or concepts.

Why Semantic Intelligence Is the Missing Link in Active Metadata and Data Governance

The new Forrester Wave™: Data Governance Solutions, Q3 2025 makes one thing clear: governance is no longer about static catalogs. Vendors are moving fast into Active Metadata and Agentic AI, with features like lineage, observability, policy enforcement, and marketplaces for data assets.

Bitext NAMER: Slashing Time and Costs in Automated Knowledge Graph Construction

The process of building Knowledge Graphs is essential for organizations seeking to organize, structure, and extract actionable insights from their data. However, traditional methods of constructing Knowledge Graphs are often slow, expensive, and complex, requiring significant expertise and manual effort. Bitext NAMER changes the game by automating key steps in the Knowledge Graph creation process, making it faster, more cost-effective, and accessible for businesses of all sizes.

Multilingual Named Entity Recognition for Knowledge Graphs: Supporting 70+ Languages with Precision

In the era of data-driven decision-making, Knowledge Graphs (KGs) have emerged as pivotal tools for structuring, organizing, and interconnecting vast amounts of information. From enhancing search engine capabilities to powering AI-driven insights, KGs rely heavily on extracting, interpreting, and linking data elements with precision. At the core of this process lies Named Entity Recognition (NER), event extraction, and relationship mapping, foundational technologies for enabling robust knowledge management. Bitext’s NER solution, NAMER, is uniquely positioned to support the growing needs of KG companies, offering unparalleled features that address common industry challenges.

How LLM Verticalization Reduces Time and Cost in GenAI-Based Solutions

Verticalizing AI21’s Jamba 1.5 with Bitext Synthetic Text

Efficiency and Benefits of Verticalizing LLMs – The Case of Jamba 1.5 Mini.

Worldwide Language Coverage

Worldwide Language Coverage

MADRID, SPAIN

Camino de las Huertas, 20, 28223 Pozuelo
Madrid, Spain

SAN FRANCISCO, USA

541 Jefferson Ave Ste 100, Redwood City
CA 94063, USA