低资源语言法律理解中，模型推理能力是失败主因，非语料问题。

Low-resource languages without an adequate training corpus often use a related, higher-resource language as a scaffold for comprehension. Still, there is a need to develop rigorous evaluation methods to identify when models fail in cross lingual low-resource environments. Using the legal domain as a backdrop, three models (Llama3, Hex-1, Sarvam) were tested on the ability to classify legal complaints written in a low resource Dravidian language (Tulu). Transliterating queries across Dravidian scripts allowed models to gain a preliminary understanding of speakers' complaints without the use of wide scale training, though the level of comprehension was heavily script dependent (with Kannada - another relatively low-resource language - producing the strongest positive trend). Retrieving from a corpus of Kannada legal papers across a RAG framework caused mixed results. Some models had a weak positive trend in comprehension under certain conditions, but when models failed, it was often across two axes: fact substitution (fixating on specific passage excerpts that skewed reasoning) and confabulation (hallucination that had no basis in either query or corpus). Within low resource domains, results identify the model's parsing of information and subsequent reasoning as the source of reasoning failure, rather than corpus contents. Script-dependent comprehension and RAG robustness also seem to travel together. This is further supported by the reasoning-trace analysis and a statistical-honesty framework deployed - techniques that are more broadly applicable to low-resource multilingual RAG evaluation.