Jeff -- Are you an Arabic reader? All advance info has indicated that Word for Mac 2011 would not still not be able to do Arabic, Hebrew, or any Indic language, leaving it 1 billion people short of what Word for Windows can handle, and thus making the "parity" assertion somewhat crazy. I am truly amazed if what you say is actually true.
As a test you can copy/paste the text examples in 8 thru 14 from this page into Word and see if any of them still look like the graphic:
The fact Office 2011 is still not 100% Cocoa (i.e. it includes great chunks of ancient Carbon code) would make it more likely Office 2011 still cannot properly do none roman languages. Only the new bits of Office 2011 are Cocoa e.g. Outlook and the ribbon user interface code and presumably the new VBA code. As a result Office 2011 as a whole is limited to being a 32bit application, something that has upset some Excel power freaks.
The fact it still extensively uses Carbon is also likely to limit the performance improvements and knowing Microsoft is also likely to mean many ancient bugs (aka. features) may still be lurking in the depths. Apple have been encouraging developers to move to Cocoa ever since Mac OS X was launched, i.e. over a decade ago! The fallacious excuse Microsofties have used that rewriting it all as Cocoa would cost too much is unjustifiable since even Microsoft admit they make far more profit from Office for Mac than Office for Windows.
[Q. How many Microsofties does it take to fix a bug? A. None, you call it a feature and move on.]
Apple would probably have liked to kill off Carbon in Mac OS X 10.6 and if not that then 10.7, however due to lard arses like Microsoft, they have needed to keep it alive. With the infrequency of Office upgrades, this probably means Apple will need to keep Carbon around until at least Mac OS X 10.8.
Note: Microsoft are making small steps forward, they at least are switching to using Apple's installer unlike Adobe (shudder!).