Common Ground: Between Formal Pragmatics and Psycholinguistics

Common ground is the information that the participants in a conversation treat as background information for the purposes of their interaction. We review two traditions of research on common ground. The formal tradition, consisting mainly of theoretical linguists and philosophers of language, has developed increasingly sophisticated formal models of common ground to generate predictions about an expanding range of empirical phenomena. Meanwhile, the psycholinguistic tradition has focused on a narrower range of phenomena while developing more realistic theories of the psychological mechanisms that allow us to select and represent common ground. After summarizing these two traditions, we consider several reasons why they should be reintegrated, and we argue that the best way to bring them back together would be to adopt a cognitive-pluralist approach, whereby language users have access to a variety of mechanisms for managing background information, which are more or less available and efficient depending on the communicative situation and the kind of information mentally represented as well as the cognitive demands of each mechanism.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Annual Review of Linguistics
Published
2025-10-29
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-linguistics-041824-032410
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Categorization, perception, and language
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
2.12
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Common Ground: Between Formal Pragmatics and Psycholinguistics

Paula Rubio‐Fernández, Daniel W. Harris
1 citations
Annual Review of Linguistics
Categorization, perception, and language
2.12
article

Common Ground: Between Formal Pragmatics and Psycholinguistics

Paula Rubio‐Fernández, Daniel W. Harris
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Common ground is the information that the participants in a conversation treat as background information for the purposes of their interaction. We review two traditions of research on common ground. The formal tradition, consisting mainly of theoretical linguists and philosophers of language, has developed increasingly sophisticated formal models of common ground to generate predictions about an expanding range of empirical phenomena. Meanwhile, the psycholinguistic tradition has focused on a narrower range of phenomena while developing more realistic theories of the psychological mechanisms that allow us to select and represent common ground. After summarizing these two traditions, we consider several reasons why they should be reintegrated, and we argue that the best way to bring them back together would be to adopt a cognitive-pluralist approach, whereby language users have access to a variety of mechanisms for managing background information, which are more or less available and efficient depending on the communicative situation and the kind of information mentally represented as well as the cognitive demands of each mechanism.

Annual Review of LinguisticsVol. 12(1)
The Graduate Center, CUNY (US), City University of New York (US), Hunter College (US), Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics (NL)
Openalex Percentile: Top 10%
Categorization, perception, and language
2.12
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.