Cover not available
Part of
Language in Interaction: Studies in honor of Eve V. Clark
Edited by Inbal Arnon, Marisa Casillas, Chigusa Kurumada and Bruno Estigarribia
[Trends in Language Acquisition Research 12] 2014
► pp. 175–190

Referential pacts in child language development

| Department of Psychology, University of Sheffield
ORCID logo | Department of Psychology, University of Sheffield
Referential pacts are temporary conventions created by interlocutors for the duration of a conversation. They occur when a speaker somewhat arbitrarily chooses between multiple possible referring expressions (e.g., saying “the spotty dog” rather than “the muddy dog” for a dog that is both spotty and muddy). A listener will expect the speaker to be consistent in this choice of expression from then on, but would not necessarily expect a new conversational partner to make the same choice. We review the adult psycholinguistic literature on referential pacts and present evidence from children. We consider pacts as a prime example of the Principles of Contrast and Convention and suggest further research is warranted into the origin of these assumptions about language use.
Published online: 17 July 2014
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/tilar.12.15ste
References (63)
References
Baldwin, D.A. (1991). Infants’ contribution to the achievement of joint reference. Child Development , 62(5), 875–890. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Barr, D.J., & Keysar, B. (2002). Anchoring comprehension in linguistic precedents. Journal of Memory and Language , 46(2), 391–418. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bortfeld, H., & Brennan, S.E. (1997). Use and acquisition of idiomatic expressions in referring by native and non-native speakers. Discourse Processes , 23(2), 119–147. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brennan, S.E., & Clark, H.H. (1996). Conceptual pacts and lexical choice in conversation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition , 22(6), 1482–1493. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brennan, S.E., Galati, A., & Kuhlen, A.K. (2010). Two minds, one dialog: Coordinating speaking and understanding. Psychology of Learning and Motivation , 53, 301–344. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brennan, S.E., & Hanna, J.E. (2009). Partner-specific adaptation in dialog. Topics in Cognitive Science , 1(2), 274–291. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brown, P.M., & Dell, G.S. (1987). Adapting production to comprehension: The explicit mention of instruments. Cognitive Psychology , 19(4), 441–472. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brown-Schmidt, S. (2009). Partner-specific interpretation of maintained referential precedents during interactive dialog. Journal of Memory and Language , 61(2), 171–190. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Callanan, M.A., & Sabbagh, M.A. (2004). Multiple labels for objects in conversations with young children: Parents’ language and children’s developing expectations about word meanings. Developmental Psychology , 40(5), 746–763. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Clark, E.V. (1987). The principle of contrast: A constraint on language acquisition. In B. MacWhinney (Ed.) Mechanisms of language acquisition (pp. 1–33). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
. (1988). On the logic of contrast. Journal of Child Language , 15(2), 317–335. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (1990). On the pragmatics of contrast. Journal of Child Language , 17(2), 417–431. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (1993). The lexicon in acquisition . Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (1997). Conceptual perspective and lexical choice in acquisition. Cognition , 64(1), 1–37. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (2009). First language acquisition . Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (2007). Conventionality and contrast in language and language acquisition. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development , 115, 11–23. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Clark, E.V., & Svaib, T.A. (1997). Speaker perspective and reference in young children. First Language , 17(51), 57–74. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Clark, H.H., & Wilkes-Gibbs, D. (1986). Referring as a collaborative process. Cognition , 22(1), 1–39. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Clark, H.H., and Brennan, S.A. (1991). Grounding in communication. In L.B. Resnick, J.M. Levine, & S.D. Teasley (Eds.). Perspectives on socially shared cognition (pp. 127–149). Washington: APA Books DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Danet, B. (1980). ‘Baby’ or ‘fetus’?: Language and the construction of reality in a manslaughter trial. Semiotica , 32(3–4), 187––220. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Deák, G.O., Yen, L., & Pettit, J. (2001). By any other name: When will preschoolers produce several labels for a referent? Journal of Child Language , 28(3), 787–804. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Diesendruck, G. (2005). The principles of conventionality and contrast in word learning: An empirical examination. Developmental Psychology , 41(3), 451–463. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Diesendruck, G., & Markson, L. (2001). Children’s avoidance of lexical overlap: A pragmatic account. Developmental Psychology , 37(5), 630–641. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Doherty, M.J. (2000). Children’s understanding of homonymy: Metalinguistic awareness and false belief. Journal of Child Language , 27(2), 367–392. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fisher, C., Church, B.A., & Chambers, K.E. (2004). Learning to identify spoken words. In D.G. Hall & S. Waxman (Eds.), Weaving a lexicon (pp. 3–40). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Fowler, C.A., Brown, J.M., Sabadini, L., & Weihing, J. (2003). Rapid access to speech gestures in perception: Evidence from choice and simple response time tasks. Journal of Memory and Language , 49(3), 396–413. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fremery, J., & Grassman, S. (In prep). Do 4-year-olds choose referential expressions according to speaker-specific referential pacts ?
Galati, A., & Brennan, S.E. (2010). Attenuating information in spoken communication: For the speaker, or for the addressee? Journal of Memory and Language , 62(1), 35–51. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Garrod, S., & Anderson, A. (1987). Saying what you mean in dialogue: A study in conceptual and semantic co-ordination. Cognition , 27(2), 181–218. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Geeraerts, D., Grondelaers, S., & Bakema, P. (1994). The structure of lexical variation: Meaning, naming, and context , Vol. 5. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goldinger, S.D. (1998). Echoes of echoes? An episodic theory of lexical access. Psychological Review , 105(2), 251–279. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Graham, S.A., Sedivy, J., & Khu, M. (2013). That’s not what you said earlier: Preschoolers expect partners to be referentially consistent. Journal of Child Language, FirstView , 1–17.Google Scholar
Huygens, C., & der Wetenschappen, H.M. (1893). Oeuvres complétes de Christiaan Huygens: Martinus Nijhoff.Google Scholar
Köymen,B.,Schmerse,D.,Lieven,E., &Tomasello, M. (submitted). Young children create partner-specific referential pacts with peers.
Krauss, R.M., & Weinheimer, S. (1966). Concurrent feedback, confirmation, and the encoding of referents in verbal communication. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology , 4(3), 343–346. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kronmüller, E., & Barr, D.J. (2007). Perspective-free pragmatics: Broken precedents and the recovery-from-preemption hypothesis. Journal of Memory and Language , 56(3), 436–455. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Levelt, W.J.M., & Kelter, S. (1982). Surface form and memory in question answering. Cognitive Psychology , 14(1), 78–106. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Levinson, S.C. (1995). Interactional biases in human thinking. In E.N. Goody (Ed.), Social intelligence and interaction: Expressions and implications of the social bias in human intelligence (pp. 221–260). Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lockridge, C., & Brennan, S. (2002). Addressees’ needs influence speakers’ early syntactic choices. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review , 9(3), 550–557. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Matthews, D., Butcher, J., Lieven, E., & Tomasello, M. (2012). Two- and four-year-olds learn to adapt referring expressions to context: Effects of distracters and feedback on referential communication. Topics in Cognitive Science , 4(2), 184–210. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Matthews, D., Lieven, E., & Tomasello, M. (2010). What’s in a manner of speaking? Children’s sensitivity to partner-specific referential precedents. Developmental Psychology , 46(4), 749–760. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Metzing, C., & Brennan, S.E. (2003). When conceptual pacts are broken: Partner-specific effects on the comprehension of referring expressions. Journal of Memory and Language , 49(2), 201–213. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nilsen, E.S., Graham, S.A., Smith, S., & Chambers, C.G. (2008). Preschoolers’ sensitivity to referential ambiguity: Evidence for a dissociation between implicit understanding and explicit behavior. Developmental Science , 11(4), 556–562. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nurmsoo, E., Robinson, E., & Butterfill, S. (2010). Children’s selective learning from others. Review of Philosophy and Psychology , 1(4), 551–561. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Perner, J., Rendl, B., & Garnham, A. (2007). Objects of desire, thought, and reality: Problems of anchoring discourse referents in development. Mind & Language , 22(5), 475–513. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Perner, J., Stummer, S., Sprung, M., & Doherty, M. (2002). Theory of mind finds its Piagetian perspective: Why alternative naming comes with understanding belief. Cognitive Development , 17(3–4), 1451–1472. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pickering, M.J., & Ferreira, V.S. (2008). Structural priming: A critical review. Psychological Bulletin , 134(3), 427–459. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pickering, M.J., & Garrod, S. (2004). Toward a mechanistic psychology of dialogue. Behavioral and Brain Sciences , 27(2), 169–190.Google Scholar
Rakoczy, H., Warneken, F., & Tomasello, M. (2008). The sources of normativity: Young children’s awareness of the normative structure of games. Developmental Psychology , 44(3), 875–881. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Richardson, D.C., & Dale, R. (2005). Looking to understand: The coupling between speakers’ and listeners’ eye movements and its relationship to discourse comprehension. Cognitive Science , 29(6), 1045–1060. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sabbagh, M.A., & Baldwin, D.A. (2001). Learning words from knowledgeable versus ignorant speakers: Links between preschoolers’ theory of mind and semantic development. Child Development , 72(4), 1054–1070. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schelling, T.C. (1980). The strategy of conflict . Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Schiffer, S.R. (1972). Meaning . Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Schober, M.F. (1993). Spatial perspective-taking in conversation. Cognition , 47(1), 1–24. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schober, M.F., & Clark, H.H. (1989). Understanding by addressees and overhearers. Cognitive Psychology , 21(2), 211–232. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Scofield, J., & Behrend, D.A. (2007). Two-year-olds differentially disambiguate novel words and facts. Journal of Child Language , 34(4), 875–889. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shintel, H., & Keysar, B. (2007). You said it before and you’ll say it again: Expectations of consistency in communication. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition , 33(2), 357–369. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (2009). Less is more: A minimalist account of joint action in communication. Topics in Cognitive Science , 1(2), 260–273. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sobel, D.M., Sedivy, J., Buchanan, D.W., & Hennessy, R. (2012). Speaker reliability in preschoolers’ inferences about the meanings of novel words. Journal of Child Language , 39(1), 90–104. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Southgate, V., Chevallier, C., & Csibra, G. (2010). Seventeen-month-olds appeal to false beliefs to interpret others’ referential communication. Developmental Science , 13(6), 907–912. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stellmann, P., & Brennan, S. (1993). Flexible perspective-setting in conversation. Paper presented at the 34th Annual Meeting of the Psychonomic Society, Washington, DC.
Van Der Wege, M.M. (2009). Lexical entrainment and lexical differentiation in reference phrase choice. Journal of Memory and Language , 60(4), 448–463. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wyman, E., Rakoczy, H., & Tomasello, M. (2009). Young children understand multiple pretend identities in their object play. British Journal of Developmental Psychology , 27(2), 385–404. DOI logoGoogle Scholar