Abstract Conversational partners who repeatedly refer to the same objects require less and less collaborative effort to do so. This is due to lexical entrainment, the fact that they come to re-use the same words. Lexical entrainment may reflect the elaboration of conceptual pacts, partner-specific agreements about how to name objects which belong to the conversational partners’ common ground. Can lexical entrainment occur even if conversational partners cannot develop conceptual pacts about specific objects? In three experiments, we investigated whether lexical entrainment occurs in the matching task even when cards change over trials and partners are not able to develop pacts. We compared two conditions: a classic condition where cards remained the same for each trial, and a new cards condition where cards changed on each trial. Lexical diversity decreased for pairs in the new cards condition (albeit less than for classical pairs); inconsistent reductions in collaborative effort were also observed. Pairs in the new cards condition also were better able to adapt to novel referring situations (involving novel stimuli or new interaction partners) than classic pairs. The results suggest that lexical entrainment in the matching task may be due in part to factors other than the elaboration of conceptual pacts. These may include the development of an overarching meta-perspective on shared features of cards, reflecting category learning processes resulting from reference negotiation.

中文翻译：

---

没有概念契约的词汇夹带？重温匹配任务

摘要 反复引用相同对象的会话伙伴需要越来越少的协作努力来做到这一点。这是由于词汇夹带，事实上，他们来重复使用相同的词。词汇夹带可能反映了概念契约的详细说明，关于如何命名属于会话伙伴共同基础的对象的特定于伙伴的协议。即使对话伙伴不能就特定对象形成概念性协议，词汇夹带能否发生？在三个实验中，我们调查了匹配任务中是否会发生词汇夹带，即使卡片在试验中发生变化并且合作伙伴无法制定协议。我们比较了两种情况：一种是经典条件，每次试验卡片都保持不变，另一种是新卡片条件，每次试验卡片都改变。在新卡条件下，配对的词汇多样性下降（尽管少于经典配对）；还观察到协作努力的减少不一致。新卡条件下的配对也比经典配对更能适应新的参考情况（涉及新的刺激或新的互动伙伴）。结果表明，匹配任务中的词汇夹带可能部分是由于概念契约的阐述以外的因素。这些可能包括开发关于卡片共享特征的总体元视角，反映参考协商产生的类别学习过程。新卡条件下的配对也比经典配对更能适应新的参考情况（涉及新的刺激或新的互动伙伴）。结果表明，匹配任务中的词汇夹带可能部分是由于概念契约的阐述以外的因素。这些可能包括开发关于卡片共享特征的总体元视角，反映参考协商产生的类别学习过程。新卡条件下的配对也比经典配对更能适应新的参考情况（涉及新的刺激或新的互动伙伴）。结果表明，匹配任务中的词汇夹带可能部分是由于概念契约的阐述以外的因素。这些可能包括开发关于卡片共享特征的总体元视角，反映参考协商产生的类别学习过程。