We incorporate natural language into games, focusing here on the class of signaling games. The sender, using a commonly understood language, can make cheap-talk statements about the strategy that he is using. Because the sender knows his strategy, any statement that he makes is either true according to its literal meaning or is intentionally false or deceptive. It is shown that if the receiver interprets any off-path statement by the sender as true unless it may be seen as a rational attempt to deceive, then the only outcomes of the game without language that survive the introduction of language are, generically, those that are stable in the sense of Kohlberg and Mertens (1986). Incorporating language into game theory can thus reap significant benefits, with the potential to significantly refine equilibrium predictions in ways that are more intuitive and more easily justified than when language is absent.

More on this topic

BFI Working Paper·Sep 18, 2025

The Impact of Language on Decision-Making: Auction Winners are Less Cursed in a Foreign Language

Fang Fu, Leigh H. Grant, Ali Hortaçsu, Boaz Keysar, Jidong Yang, and Karen J. Ye
Topics: Uncategorized
BFI Working Paper·Aug 20, 2025

Partial Language Acquisition: The Impact of Conformity

William A. Brock, Bo Chen, Steven Durlauf, and Shlomo Weber
Topics: Uncategorized
BFI Working Paper·Aug 12, 2025

Seemingly Virtuous Complexity in Return Prediction

Stefan Nagel
Topics: Uncategorized