Data from: The positive side of a negative reference: the delay between linguistic processing and common ground

Interlocutors converge on names to refer to entities. For example, a speaker might refer to a novel looking object as the jellyfish and, once identified, the listener will too. The hypothesized mechanism behind such referential precedents is a subject of debate. The common ground view claims that listeners register the object as well as the identity of the speaker who coined the label. The linguistic view claims that, once established, precedents are treated by listeners like any other linguistic unit, i.e. without needing to keep track of the speaker. To test predictions from each account, we used visual-world eyetracking, which allows observations in real time, during a standard referential communication task. Participants had to select objects based on instructions from two speakers. In the critical condition, listeners sought an object with a negative reference such as not the jellyfish. We aimed to determine the extent to which listeners rely on the linguistic input, common ground or both. We found that initial interpretations were based on linguistic processing only and that common ground considerations do emerge but only after 1000 ms. Our findings support the idea that—at least temporally—linguistic processing can be isolated from common ground.

对话双方会就实体的指称名称达成共识。例如，说话者可将一件外形新奇的物体称为"水母"，在该物体被识别后，听者也会沿用这一称呼。这类指称先例背后的潜在机制一直存在争议。共同背景观（common ground view）认为，听者不仅会记录所指物体的信息，还会记住创造该指称标签的说话者身份；而语言学观则主张，一旦指称先例确立，听者会将其视作普通语言单位进行处理，无需追踪说话者身份。为验证两种理论的预测，我们在标准指称沟通任务中采用了可实时观测行为的视觉情境眼动追踪（visual-world eyetracking）技术。实验中，被试需根据两名说话者的指令选择对应物体。在关键实验条件下，听者需要依据"不是那个水母"这类否定指称来搜寻目标物体。本研究旨在探明听者在处理指称任务时，多大程度上依赖语言输入、共同背景，或是二者兼具。研究结果显示，听者的初始解读仅基于语言加工过程；而共同背景考量虽会产生影响，但仅在任务启动1000毫秒后才显现。我们的发现支持了这一观点：至少在时间维度上，语言加工可与共同背景处理相互分离。