Do Multilingual Encoders Produce Language-Consistent Semantic IDs?

Multimodal LLMs use dedicated encoders to bridge non-language modalities (vision encoders for images, depth models for audio codec tokens) because raw token embeddings alone cannot capture modality-specific structure. We argue that Semantic IDs (SIDs), the hierarchical codes used in generative recommendation, constitute another such modality: a SID level token's meaning depends on its prefix context, yet current systems simply add SID tokens to the vocabulary and rely on training to learn these context-dependent meanings from scratch. We propose PrefixMem, a lightweight SID encoder based on prefix n-gram memory tables that provides the LLM with structured, prefix-conditioned representations at SID token positions. Like vision encoders in multimodal LLMs, PrefixMem can be pre-trained independently and then attached to any LLM for joint training. We evaluate on large-scale data from Pinterest across multiple LLM families and show that PrefixMem improves deepest-level SID accuracy by up to 46% relative and full-SID retrieval recall by up to 22% relative at matched training compute. The encoder's benefit concentrates on hard examples where greedy decoding fails, with up to 77% relative accuracy gains, confirming that SID tokens benefit from a dedicated encoder just as other non-language modalities do.

Recent multilingual vision--language encoders cover hundreds of languages in a single model, yet on two state-of-the-art instances retrieval on low-resource languages (LRL; e.g. Swahili) trails high-resource ones (HRL; e.g. English) by $30^+$,pp. We ask where in the trained encoder this gap is located. Prior modality-gap and cross-lingual subspace work suggests a linear language direction at the output crowds out alignment-relevant geometry. We falsify this: LEACE drives the linear language classifier from $>99\%$ to near chance and iterated INLP to $37$--$50\%$ while LRL retrieval moves within $\pm 1.5$,pp and all tier means within $2.2$,pp, tracking random controls. The linear bias is a \emph{symptom}, not the cause. Instead, the alignment-causal factor lies along the encoder's forward path: the EOS (end-of-sequence) hidden state's per-language trajectory diverges with depth. Substituting the EOS with its parallel English value three blocks before the projector lifts Swahili from $22.1\%$ to $69.1\%$ on one encoder (and reproduces on the other); three controls rule out pooled-position tautology and English specificity. A front-layer trunk that pulls each language's projection toward the parallel-content centroid corroborates the diagnosis at training time, recovering $+9.6$ / $+17.1$,pp on LRL XM3600 retrieval (1{,}000-image subset), with consistent gains across three further benchmarks while preserving HRL performance.

Multilingual encoder-based language models are widely used for code-mixed analysis, yet their internal representations of code-mixed inputs -- and their relationship to the constituent languages -- remain poorly understood. Using Hindi-English as a case study, we construct a unified trilingual corpus of parallel English, Hindi (Devanagari), and Romanized code-mixed sentences. We then probe cross-lingual representation alignment in standard multilingual encoders and their code-mix-adapted variants using CKA, token-level saliency, and entropy-based uncertainty analysis. We find that while standard models align English and Hindi well, code-mixed inputs remain loosely connected to either language -- and that continued pre-training on code-mixed data improves English-code-mixed alignment at the cost of English-Hindi alignment. Interpretability analyses further reveal a clear asymmetry: models process code-mixed text through an English-dominant semantic subspace, while native-script Hindi provides complementary signals that reduce representational uncertainty. Motivated by these findings, we introduce a trilingual post-training alignment objective that brings code-mixed representations closer to both constituent languages simultaneously, yielding more balanced cross-lingual alignment and downstream gains on sentiment analysis and hate speech detection -- showing that grounding code-mixed representations in their constituent languages meaningfully helps cross-lingual understanding. Code is available at: https://github.com/debajyotimaz/tri_align_EMNLP_2026.