Ebru Evcen @ebruevcen.bsky.social · 05/08/2026I'm very happy to share that I'll be joining @bergelsonlab.bsky.social at Harvard as a postdoc in September!! We'll work on how babies learn word meanings, and tons more! 6313
Reposted by Ebru EvcenKhuyen Le @knle.bsky.social · 16/07/2026How do children learn new words? Do they simply track word-object co-occurrences across contexts, or do they also use information about what speakers know and intend? With @mzettersten.bsky.social and @drbarner.bsky.social, I tackled this question in our new preprint! 1/🧵👇 osf.io/preprints/ps...osf.ioOSF 1244
Reposted by Ebru EvcenDavid Barner @drbarner.bsky.social · 18/06/2026This paper explores how we reason about other people's minds when they make conditional statements, using some super creative methods cooked up by @ebruevcen.bsky.social. TL/DR, the inferences you draw about if>then statements depends crucially on the background knowledge of the speaker. 042
Ebru Evcen @ebruevcen.bsky.social · 17/06/2026New paper w/Alan Bale & @drbarner.bsky.social in Journal of Semantics!🎉 We show in 3 studies that conditionals get strengthened to "only if" depending on listeners' access to alternatives, constrained by QUD & speaker knowledge, paralleling other forms of pragmatic inference. doi.org/10.1093/jos/...doi.orgConditional inference and access to alternatives: the role of QUD and speaker knowledge in conditional perfectionAbstract. Conditional statements often imply meanings that extend beyond their literal content, influenced by contextual factors such as the Question Under 1157
Reposted by Ebru EvcenDavid Barner @drbarner.bsky.social · 29/05/2026Children actually CAN compute scalar implicatures & only fail when we proffer "worlds" that invite unintended inferences. Check out new work by @ebruevcen.bsky.social showing early success in a standard TVJ task for both disjunction & some/all & how this totally changes our lab's account of failire. 0112
Ebru Evcen @ebruevcen.bsky.social · 29/05/2026New preprint w/ @drbarner.bsky.social, and probably the most fun project I've worked on!! Past studies find kids fail to compute scalar implicatures. Do those tasks test spontaneous interpretation, or do they proffer worlds kids would never consider? 🧵 osf.io/preprints/ps...osf.ioOSF 1247
Reposted by Ebru EvcenUrvi Maheshwari ツ @urvi.bsky.social · 29/01/2026New w/ @drbarner.bsky.social! We argue that children's struggle to represent the past and future in common tests of knowledge may stem from difficulties in hypothetical reasoning about imaginary timelines, rather than a lack of knowledge about time. 1/n academic.oup.com/chidev/advan...academic.oup.comBack to reality: Children's early temporal reasoning applies to real but not hypothetical eventsAbstract. Time words like “yesterday” and “tomorrow” are hard for children to learn, and for researchers to study, because their referents change from day 43411
Ebru Evcen @ebruevcen.bsky.social · 12/09/2025Now out in Open Mind! @drbarner.bsky.social and I find that when people hear a conditional statement like “If you mow the lawn, you’ll get $5,” they often interpret it as “only if you mow the lawn”, a pragmatic, perfected meaning. doi.org/10.1162/opmi...doi.orgAlready Perfect: Language Users Access the Pragmatic Meanings of Conditionals FirstAbstract. Conditional statements often have two interpretations. For instance, the statement, “If you mow the lawn, you will receive $5”, might be understood to mean that mowing the lawn is just one p... 1166
Reposted by Ebru EvcenDavid Barner @drbarner.bsky.social · 21/05/2024This new project by the 🎉fantastic🎉 @ebruevcen.bsky.social shows in 4 studies that people’s first understanding of conditionals is pragmatic - using RT data, then with a cognitive load task. This is contrary to what’s found for other pragmatic inferences w/ interesting implications for acquisition. 283
Ebru Evcen @ebruevcen.bsky.social · 19/05/2024New preprint w @drbarner.bsky.social! When you hear, "If you mow the lawn, you’ll get $5," do you immediately think, "No $5 if I don't?" Turns out, that's no coincidence - we show that people start with pragmatic interpretations of conditionals, considering literal ones when necessary. osf.io/mv3y8osf.ioOSF 070