Paula Rubio-Fernández

Publications

Displaying 1 - 6 of 6
  • Rubio-Fernandez, P. (2025). First acquiring articles in a second language: A new approach to the study of language and social cognition. Lingua, 313: 103851. doi:10.1016/j.lingua.2024.103851.

    Abstract

    Pragmatic phenomena are characterized by extreme variability, which makes it difficult to draw sound generalizations about the role of social cognition in pragmatic language by and large. I introduce cultural evolutionary pragmatics as a new framework for the study of the interdependence between language and social cognition, and point at the study of common-ground management across languages and ages as a way to test the reliance of pragmatic language on social cognition. I illustrate this new research line with three experiments on article use by second language speakers, whose mother tongue lacks articles. These L2 speakers are known to find article use challenging and it is often argued that their difficulties stem from articles being pragmatically redundant. Contrary to this view, the results of this exploratory study support the view that proficient article use requires automatizing basic socio-cognitive processes, offering a window into the interdependence between language and social cognition.
  • Rubio-Fernandez, P., Berke, M. D., & Jara-Ettinger, J. (2025). Tracking minds in communication. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 29(3), 269-281. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2024.11.005.

    Abstract

    How might social cognition help us communicate through language? At what levels does this interaction occur? In classical views, social cognition is independent of language, and integrating the two can be slow, effortful, and error-prone. But new research into word level processes reveals that communication
    is brimming with social micro-processes that happen in real time, guiding even the simplest choices like how we use adjectives, articles, and demonstratives. We interpret these findings in the context of advances in theoretical models of social cognition and propose a Communicative Mind-Tracking
    framework, where social micro-processes aren’t a secondary process in how we use language—they are fundamental to how communication works.
  • Long, M., Rohde, H., & Rubio-Fernandez, P. (2020). The pressure to communicate efficiently continues to shape language use later in life. Scientific Reports, 10: 8214. doi:10.1038/s41598-020-64475-6.

    Abstract

    Language use is shaped by a pressure to communicate efficiently, yet the tendency towards redundancy is said to increase in older age. The longstanding assumption is that saying more than is necessary is inefficient and may be driven by age-related decline in inhibition (i.e. the ability to filter out irrelevant information). However, recent work proposes an alternative account of efficiency: In certain contexts, redundancy facilitates communication (e.g., when the colour or size of an object is perceptually salient and its mention aids the listener’s search). A critical question follows: Are older adults indiscriminately redundant, or do they modulate their use of redundant information to facilitate communication? We tested efficiency and cognitive capacities in 200 adults aged 19–82. Irrespective of age, adults with better attention switching skills were redundant in efficient ways, demonstrating that the pressure to communicate efficiently continues to shape language use later in life.

    Additional information

    supplementary table S1 dataset 1
  • Rubio-Fernández, P., & Jara-Ettinger, J. (2020). Incrementality and efficiency shape pragmatics across languages. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117, 13399-13404. doi:10.1073/pnas.1922067117.

    Abstract

    To correctly interpret a message, people must attend to the context in which it was produced. Here we investigate how this process, known as pragmatic reasoning, is guided by two universal forces in human communication: incrementality and efficiency, with speakers of all languages interpreting language incrementally and making the most efficient use of the incoming information. Crucially, however, the interplay between these two forces results in speakers of different languages having different pragmatic information available at each point in processing, including inferences about speaker intentions. In particular, the position of adjectives relative to nouns (e.g., “black lamp” vs. “lamp black”) makes visual context information available in reverse orders. In an eye-tracking study comparing four unrelated languages that have been understudied with regard to language processing (Catalan, Hindi, Hungarian, and Wolof), we show that speakers of languages with an adjective–noun order integrate context by first identifying properties (e.g., color, material, or size), whereas speakers of languages with a noun–adjective order integrate context by first identifying kinds (e.g., lamps or chairs). Most notably, this difference allows listeners of adjective–noun descriptions to infer the speaker’s intention when using an adjective (e.g., “the black…” as implying “not the blue one”) and anticipate the target referent, whereas listeners of noun–adjective descriptions are subject to temporary ambiguity when deriving the same interpretation. We conclude that incrementality and efficiency guide pragmatic reasoning across languages, with different word orders having different pragmatic affordances.
  • Khemlani, S., Leslie, S.-J., Glucksberg, S., & Rubio-Fernández, P. (2007). Do ducks lay eggs? How people interpret generic assertions. In D. S. McNamara, & J. G. Trafton (Eds.), Proceedings of the 29th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (CogSci 2007). Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.
  • Rubio-Fernández, P. (2007). Suppression in metaphor interpretation: Differences between meaning selection and meaning construction. Journal of Semantics, 24(4), 345-371. doi:10.1093/jos/ffm006.

    Abstract

    Various accounts of metaphor interpretation propose that it involves constructing an ad hoc concept on the basis of the concept encoded by the metaphor vehicle (i.e. the expression used for conveying the metaphor). This paper discusses some of the differences between these theories and investigates their main empirical prediction: that metaphor interpretation involves enhancing properties of the metaphor vehicle that are relevant for interpretation, while suppressing those that are irrelevant. This hypothesis was tested in a cross-modal lexical priming study adapted from early studies on lexical ambiguity. The different patterns of suppression of irrelevant meanings observed in disambiguation studies and in the experiment on metaphor reported here are discussed in terms of differences between meaning selection and meaning construction.

Share this page