Social cognitive and later language acquisition
A great number of studies suggest that children’s acquisition of mental-state language supports, or even facilitates, their understanding of others’ mental states and perspectives. However, based on previous research, it has often been difficult to determine which aspects of mental-state language support this so-called Theory of Mind understanding. Whereas some researchers have argued that it is the semantics of mental verbs, such as think and know, others have suggested that it is the subordinate structure of complement-clause constructions, such as She thinks that the sticker is in the red box. In English, these two aspects are often confounded: mental verbs are typically used in complement-clause constructions. However, more recent studies have turned to languages such as Chinese and German, which allow us to distinguish between verbal semantics and syntactic constructions and also look at their interaction. Overall, these studies suggest that both semantics and syntax can play a role in children’s Theory of Mind development. In this chapter I also present some findings that indicate that whether or not the semantics of mental verbs supports children’s Theory of Mind development depends on how exactly they are used in complement-clause constructions. Since these usage patterns differ across languages, we can also see cross-linguistic differences in the interaction between verbal semantics, syntactic patterns and Theory of Mind development.
Article outline
- Preface
- Language acquisition and Theory of Mind in interaction
- Interactions between syntax, verbal semantics and false belief
- Interactions between syntax, verbal semantics and false belief from a cross-linguistic perspective
- Looking at usage patterns and functions across languages
- Summary and conclusion
-
Note
-
References
References (37)
References
Astington, J. W., & Jenkins, J. M. (1999). A longitudinal study of the relation between language and theory-of-mind development. Developmental Psychology, 35(5), 1311–1320. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Bannard, C., Lieven, E., & Tomasello, M. (2009). Modeling children’s early grammatical knowledge. PNAS, 106, 17284–17289. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Boeg Thomsen, D., Theakston, A., Kandemirci, B., & Brandt, S. (in prep.). Complements and false belief: A longitudinal study with 2- to 3-year-olds.
Brandt, S., & Buttelmann, D. (2015, September). Theory of Mind and complex syntax. Paper presented at the Developmental Section and Social Section Annual Conference of the British Psychological Society, Manchester, UK.
Brandt, S., Buttelmann, D., Lieven, E. V., & Tomasello, M. (2016). Children’s understanding of first and third person perspectives in complement clauses and false belief tasks. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 151, 131–143. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Brandt, S., Lieven, E. V., & Tomasello, M. (2010). Development of word order in German complement-clause constructions: Effects of input frequencies, lexical items, and discourse function. Language, 86, 583–610. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Brandt, S., Li, H., & Chan, A. (under revision) What makes a complement false? Looking at the effects of verbal semantics and perspective in Mandarin children’s interpretation of complement clauses and their false-belief understanding. Applied Psycholinguistics.
Carlson, S. M., Moses, L. J., & Breton, C. (2002). How specific is the relation between executive function and theory of mind? Contributions of inhibitory control and working memory. Infant and Child Development, 11, 73–92. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Cheung, H., Husan-Chih, C., Creed, N., Ng, L., Wang, S., & Mo, L. (2004). Relative roles of general and complementation language in theory of mind development: Evidence from Cantonese and English. Child Development, 75, 1155–1170. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Cheung, H., Chen, H., & Yeung, W. (2009). Relations between mental verb and false belief understanding in Cantonese-speaking children. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 104, 141–155. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Davis, H. L., & Pratt, C. (1995). The development of children’s Theory of Mind: The working memory explanation. Australian Journal of Psychology, 47, 25–31. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Diessel, H. (2004). The acquisition of complex sentences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Farrar, M. J., Benigno, J. P., Tompkins, V., & Gage, N. A. (2017). Are there different pathways to explicit false belief understanding? General language and complementation in typical and atypical children. Cognitive Development, 43, 49–66. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Farrar, M. J., & Maag, L. (2002). Early language development and the emergence of a theory of mind. First Language, 22, 197–213. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Harris, P. L., de Rosnay, M., & Pons, F. (2005). Language and children’s understanding of mental states. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 14(2), 69–73. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Howard Gola, A. A. (2012). Mental verb input for promoting children’s theory of mind: A training study. Cognitive Development, 27, 64–76. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lewis, S., Hacquard, V., & Lidz, J. (2017). “Think” pragmatically: Children’s interpretation of belief reports. Language Learning and Development, 13(4), 395–417. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lohmann, H., & Tomasello, M. (2003). The role of language in the development of false belief understanding: A training study. Child Development, 74, 1130–1144. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lu, H., Su, Y., & Wang, Q. (2008). Talking about others facilitates theory of mind in Chinese preschoolers. Developmental Psychology, 44(6), 1726–1736. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
MacWhinney, B. (2000). The CHILDES project: Tools for analyzing talk. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Milligan, K., Astington, J. W., & Dack, L. A. (2007). Language and Theory of Mind: Meta-analysis of the relation between language ability and false-belief understanding. Child Development, 78, 622–646. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Moore, C., Bryant, D., & Furrow, D. (1989). Mental terms and the development of certainty. Child Development, 60, 167–171. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Perner, J., Sprung, M., Zauner, P., & Haider, H. (2003). Want that is understood well before say that, think that, and false belief: A test of de Villiers’ linguistic determinism on German-speaking children. Child Development, 74, 179–188. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Perner, J., Stummer, S., Sprung, M., & Doherty, M. (2002). Theory of Mind finds its Piagetian perspective: Why alternative naming comes with understanding belief. Cognitive Development, 17, 1451–1472. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Pyers, J. E., & Senghas, A. (2009). Language promotes false-belief understanding: evidence from learners of a new sign language. Psychological Science, 20(7), 805–12. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Ruffman, T., Slade, L., & Crowe, E. (2002). The relation between children’s and mothers’ mental state language and theory-of-mind understanding. Child Development, 73, 734–751. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Schick, B., De Villiers, P., De Villiers, J., & Hoffmeister, R. (2007). Language and Theory of Mind: A study of deaf children. Child Development, 78(2), 376–396. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Senghas, A., & Coppola, M. (2001). Children creating language: How Nicaraguan Sign Language acquired a spatial grammar. Psychological Science, 12, 323–328. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Tardif, T., So, C., & Kaciroti, N. (2007). Language and false belief: Evidence for general, not specific effects in Cantonese-speaking preschoolers. Developmental Psychology, 43, 318–340. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Tardif, T., & Wellman, H. M. (2000). Acquisition of mental state language in Mandarin- and Cantonese-speaking children. Developmental Psychology, 36(1), 25–43. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Theakston, A., & Lieven, E. V. (2017). Multiunit sequences in first language acquisition. Topics in Cognitive Science, 9, 588–603. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Verhagen, A. (2005). Constructions of intersubjectivity. Discourse, syntax and cognition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Villiers, J. de. (2007). The interface of language and Theory of Mind. Lingua, 117, 1858–1878. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Villiers, J. G. de, & Pyers, J. E. (2002). Complements to cognition: A longitudinal study of the relationship between complex syntax and false-belief-understanding. Cognitive Development, 17(1), 1037–1060. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Wellman, H. M., Cross, D., & Watson, J. (2001). Meta-analysis of Theory of Mind development: The truth about false belief. Child Development, 72, 655–684. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Wimmer, H., & Perner, J. (1983). Beliefs about beliefs: Representation and constraining function of wrong beliefs in young children’s understanding of deception. Cognition, 13, 103–128. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Cited by (2)
Cited by two other publications
Montgomery, Derek E.
2023.
Language and children's understanding of knowledge: Epistemic talk in early childhood.
Mind & Language 38:4
► pp. 1102 ff.
![DOI logo](//benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
Ferretti, Francesco & Ines Adornetti
2021.
Persuasive conversation as a new form of communication inHomo sapiens.
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 376:1824
![DOI logo](//benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 30 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers.
Any errors therein should be reported to them.