Cover not available
Part of
Semantics in Language Acquisition
Edited by Kristen Syrett and Sudha Arunachalam
[Trends in Language Acquisition Research 24] 2018
► pp. 221–245

Chapter 10
Perspectives on truth

The case of language and false belief reasoning

 | Smith College
Many theorists take language – vocabulary, mental verbs, syntax, counterfactuals, discourse – to be a significant help in the development of explicit Theory of Mind. Does conversation, with all its point-of-view indicators, betray another’s perspective? By comparing how different linguistic markers behave across clausal environments, I demonstrate that they fall into distinct classes, only one of which – tense – patterns with the truth of the clause in terms of perspective. Sentences with embedded finite complements thus have a special role in representing the truth or falsity of others’ beliefs. Children who master embedded sentential complements can then more readily reason about others’ false beliefs.
Keywords: perspective, point of view, deixis, complements, theory of mind, direct speech, syntax, finiteness
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Points of view
    • 2.1Personal pronouns
    • 2.2Spatial deixis
    • 2.3Demonstrative deixis
    • 2.4Personal taste adjectives
    • 2.5Opinion adverbs
    • 2.6Designators
    • 2.7Evidentials
  • 3.Conversation and perspective
  • 4.Embedded complements
    • 4.1Propositional attitudes
    • 4.2Infant theory of mind
    • 4.3When do complements emerge?
  • 5.Point of view across clauses
    • 5.1Truth and tense
    • 5.2Deixis
    • 5.3Reference and description
    • 5.4Summary
  • 6.Implications
  • 7.Is linguistic encoding required?
  • 8.Conclusion
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 2 August 2018
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/tilar.24.10vil
References (90)
References
Aikhenvald, A. Y. (2004). Evidentiality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Aksu-Koc, A., Avci, G., Aydin, C., Sefer, N., & Yasa, Y. (2005). The relation between mental verbs and ToM performance: Evidence from Turkish children. Paper presented at the IASCL Convention, Berlin, July.
Apperly, I., & Butterfill, S. (2009). Do humans have two systems to track beliefs and belief-like states? Psychological Review, 20, 521–536.Google Scholar
Apperly, I., & Robinson, E. J. (1998). Children’s mental representation of referential relations. Cognition, 67, 287–309. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Baillargeon, R., Scott, R., & He, Z. (2010). False-belief understanding in infants. Trends in Cognitive Science, 14, 110–118. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bartsch, K., & Wellman, H. (1995). Children talk about the mind. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Berman, R., & Slobin, D. I. (1994). Relating events in narrative: A cross-linguistic developmental study. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Bloom, L., Rispoli, M., Gartner, B., & Hafitz, J. (1989). Acquisition of complementation. Journal of Child Language, 16, 101–120. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brentano, F. (1874). Psychologie vom empirischen Standpunkt. Leipzig: Duncker & Humblot. Online: <[URL]>
Brown, R. (1973). A first language: The early stages. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Butterfill, S. A., & Apperly, I. A. (2013). How to construct a minimal Theory of Mind. Mind & Language, 28, 606–637. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Carey, S. (2004). Bootstrapping and the origin of concepts. Daedalus, 133, 59–68. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Carruthers, P. (1996). Simulation and self-knowledge: A defence of theory-theory. In P. Carruthers & P. K. Smith (Eds.), Theories of theories of mind. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cheung, H., Hsuan-Chih, C., Creed, C. Ng, L., Ping 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 logoGoogle Scholar
Clark, E. V., & Sengul, C. J. (1978). Strategies in the acquisition of deixis. Journal of Child Language, 5, 457–475. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Collins, J. (2000). Theory of Mind, Logical Form and eliminativism. Philosophical Psychology, 13, 465–490. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dale, P., & Crain-Thoreson, C. (1993). Pronoun reversals: Who, when, and why? Journal of Child Language, 20, 573–589. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
de Villiers, J. G. (1999). On acquiring the structural representations for false complements. In B. Hollebrandse (Ed.), New perspectives on language acquisition (pp. 191–236). Amherst, MA: GLSA.Google Scholar
(2005). Can language acquisition give children a point of view? In J. W. Astington & J. Baird (Eds.), Why language matters for Theory of Mind. (pp. 189–219). Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2007) The interface of language and Theory of Mind. Lingua, 117, 1858–1878. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
de Villiers, P. A., & de Villiers, J. G. (1974). On this, that and the other: Non-egocentrism in very young children. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 18, 438–447. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
de Villiers, J. G., & de Villiers, P. A. (2009). Complements enable representation of the contents of false beliefs: Evolution of a theory of Theory of Mind. In S. Foster-Cohen (Ed.), Language acquisition (pp. 169–195). Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
de Villiers, P. A., de Villiers, J. G., Lindley, E., & Chen, M. (2015). Language, inhibitory control, and explicit false belief understanding: A longitudinal structural equation model. Poster presentation at the Society for Research in Child Development Biennial Convention, Philadelphia, PA.
de Villiers, J. G., & Garfield, J. (2017). Evidentiality, questions and the reflection principle in Tibetan: What do children learn when they learn about evidentiality? In F. N. Ketrez, A. C. Küntay, Ş. Özçalışkan, & A. Özyürek (Eds.), Social environment and cognition in language development: Studies in honor of Ayhan Aksu-Koç (pp. 113–132). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
de Villiers, J. G., Garfield, J., Gernet Girard, H., Roeper, T., & Speas, P. (2009). Evidentials in Tibetan: Acquisition, semantics and cognitive development. In S. Fitneva & Matsui, T. (Eds.), Evidentiality: A window into language and development. Special issue of New Directions for Adolescent and Child Development 125: 29–48.Google Scholar
de Villiers, J. G., Roeper, T., Harrington, E., & Gadilauskas, E. (2012). Tense and Truth in children’s question answering. In A. Biller, E. Chung, & A. Kimball (Eds.), Proceedings of the 36th annual Boston University Conference on Language Development (pp. 152–163). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
de Villiers, J. G., Nordmeyer, A., & Kravitz, M. (2010). Maintaining a point of view across multiple pronoun switches. Poster presented at Generative Approaches to Language Acquisition–North America, Toronto.
de Villiers, J. G., & Pyers, J. (2002). Complements to cognition: A longitudinal study of the relationship between complex syntax and false belief understanding. Cognitive Development, 17, 1037–1060. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
de Villiers, J. G., & Roeper, T. (2016). The acquisition of complements. In J. Lidz, W. Snyder, & J. Pater (Eds.), Oxford handbook of developmental linguistics (pp. 279–309). Oxford: Oxford University press.Google Scholar
de Villiers, J. G., Roeper, T., & Vainikka, A. (1990). The acquisition of long distance rules. In L. Frazier & J. G. de Villiers (Eds.), Language processing and acquisition (pp. 257–297). Dordrecht: Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Diessel, H., & Tomasello. M. (2001) The acquisition of finite complement clauses in English: A corpus-based analysis. Cognitive Linguistics, 12, 1–45. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dunn, J., & Brophy, M. (2005). Communication, relationships, and individual differences in children–s understanding of mind. In J. W. Astington & J. A. Baird (Eds.), Why language matters for Theory of Mind (pp. 50–69). Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fay, W. (1979). Personal pronouns and the autistic child. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 9, 247–260. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fenici, M. (2014) A simple explanation of apparent early mindreading: Infants’ sensitivity to goals and gaze direction. Phenomenology in Cognitive Science, 14, 497–515. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fillmore, C. (1975). Santa Cruz lectures on deixis, 1971. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Linguistics Club.Google Scholar
Fillmore, C. J. (1971/1997). Coming and going. Lectures on deixis. Distributed by the Indiana Linguistics Club. Available online: <[URL]>
Fodor, J. A. (1975). The language of thought. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Frege, G. (1948). Sense and reference. The Philosophical Review, 57, 209–230. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Garrett, E. (2001). Evidentiality and assertion in Tibetan (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of California, Los Angeles, CA.Google Scholar
Girouard, P., Ricard, M., & Decarie, T. G. (1997). The acquisition of personal pronouns in French-speaking and English-speaking children. Journal of Child Language, 24, 311–326. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Golinkoff, R.M., de Villiers, J., Hirsh-Pasek, K., Iglesias, A., & Wilson, M.S. (2017). User’s manual for the Quick Interactive Language Screener ™ (QUILS™): A measure of vocabulary, syntax, and language acquisition skills in young children. Baltimore: Brookes Publishing Co.Google Scholar
Gordon, R. M. (1986). Folk psychology as simulation. Mind and Language, 1, 158–171. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gu, C. C., & Roeper, T. (2011) Acquisition arguments for a general point of view as an alternative to relativism and subjectivity (Unpublished manuscript). University of Massachusetts, Amherst.Google Scholar
Hale, C. M., & Tager-Flusberg, H. (2003). The influence of language on Theory of Mind: A training study. Developmental Science, 6, 346–359. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hanson, N. R. (1958). Patterns of discovery: An inquiry into the conceptual foundations of science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Harris, P. (2005). Conversation, pretense, and Theory of Mind. In J. W. Astington & J. A. Baird (Eds.), Why language matters for Theory of Mind (pp. 70–83). Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hendriks, P., & Spenader, J. (2005/2006). When production precedes comprehension: An optimization approach to the acquisition of pronouns. Language Acquisition, 13, 319–348. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hinzen, W. (2013). Naturalizing pluralism about truth. In C. Wright & N. Pedersen (Eds.), Truth and pluralism (pp. 213–237). Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hollebrandse, B. (2000). The acquisition of sequence of tense (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Massachusetts, Amherst.Google Scholar
van Hout, A., Harrigan, K., & de Villiers, J. G. (2010). Asymmetries in the acquisition of definite and indefinite noun phrases. In P. Hendriks & C. Koster (Eds.), Asymmetries in child language. Special issue of Lingua, 120, 1973–1990.Google Scholar
Hutto, D. D. (2007). Folk psychological narratives: The social basis of understanding reasons. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Kamawar, D., & Olson, D. R. (1999). Children’s representational theory of language: The problem of opaque contexts. Cognitive Development, 14, 531–548. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Karmiloff-Smith, A. (1981). A functional approach to child language: A study of determiners and reference. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Klein, W. (1998). Assertion and finiteness. In N. Dittmar & Z. Penner (Eds.), Issues in the theory of language acquisition: Essays in honor of Jürgen Weissenborn (pp. 225–245). Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Lasersohn, P. (2005). Context dependence, disagreement, and predicates of personal taste. Linguistics and Philosophy, 28, 643–686. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lewis, S., Hacquard, V., & Lidz, J. (2013). The semantics and pragmatics of belief reports in preschoolers. In A. Chereches (Ed.) Proceedings of Semantics and Linguistic Theory 22 (pp. 247–267). Ithaca, NY: CLC Publications.Google Scholar
Lin, J. W. (2010). A tenseless analysis of mandarin Chinese revisited: A response to Sybesma 2007. Linguistic Inquiry, 41(2), 305–329. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lin, T-H. J. (2011). Finiteness of clauses and raising of arguments in Mandarin Chinese. Syntax, 14, 48–73. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
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 logoGoogle Scholar
Low, J., & Watts, J. (2013). Attributing false beliefs about object identity reveals a signature blind spot in humans‘ efficient mind-reading system. Psychological Science, 24, 30–311. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Milligan, K., Astington, J., & Dack, L. (2007). Language and Theory of Mind: Meta-analysis of the relation between language ability and false-belief understanding. Child Development, 79, 622–646. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nelson, K. (2005). Language pathways into the community of minds. In J. Astington & J. Baird (Eds.), Why language matters for Theory of Mind (pp. 26–49). Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
O’Connor, A. Burgin, C., de Villiers, J. G., Speas, P., & Roeper, T. (2007). How children coordinate multiple deictic terms in sentences. Poster presented at the Society for Research in Child Development, Boston, April.
Onishi, K. H., & Baillargeon, R. (2005). Do 15-month-old infants understand false beliefs? Science, 308, 255–258. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Oshima-Takane, Y. (1988). Children learn from speech not addressed to them: The case of personal pronouns. Journal of Child language, 15, 95–108. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1999). The learning of first and second person pronouns in English. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Oshima-Takane, Y., Takane, Y., & Shultz, T. R. (1999). The learning of first and second person pronouns in English: Network models and analysis. Journal of Child Language, 26, 545–575. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pearson, H. (2015). Attitude verbs (Unpublished manuscript). Queen Mary University of London. Available online at semanticsarchive.netGoogle Scholar
Perner, J., Zauner, P., & Sprung, M. (2005). What does ‘that’ have to do with point of view? The case of conflicting desires and ‘want’ in German. In J. W. Astington & J. Baird (Eds.), Why language matters for Theory of Mind (pp. 220–244). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Potts, C. (2007). The expressive dimension. Theoretical Linguistics, 33, 165–197. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pyers, J. E., & Senghas, A. (2009). Language promotes false-belief understanding evidence from learners of a new sign language. Psychological Science, 20, 805–812. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Quine, W. (1956). Quantifiers and propositional attitudes. Journal of Philosophy, 53, 177–187. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Richards, B. (1976). Adverbs: From a logical point of view. Synthese, 32, 329–372. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Roeper, T. (2007). The prism of grammar. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Roeper, T., & de Villiers, J. G. (1991). Ordered decisions in the acquisition of wh-questions. In H. Goodluck, J. Weissenborn, & T. Roeper (Eds.), Theoretical issues in language development (pp. 191–236). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
(2011). The acquisition path for wh-questions. In J. G. de Villiers & T. Roeper (Eds.), Handbook of generative approaches to language acquisition (pp. 186–246). Dordrecht: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ruffman, T., Slade, L., Rowlandson, K., Rumsey, C., & Garnham, A. (2003). How language relates to belief, desire and emotion understanding. Cognitive Development, 18, 139–158. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Russell, J. (1987). “Can we say…?” Children’s understanding of intensionality. Cognition, 25, 289–308. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schick, B., de Villiers, P. A., de Villiers J. G., & Hoffmeister, R. (2007). Language and false belief reasoning; A study of deaf children. Child Development, 78, 376–398. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Scott, R. M., Richman, J. C., & Baillargeon, R. (2015). Infants understand deceptive intentions to implant false beliefs about identity: New evidence for early mentalistic reasoning. Cognitive Psychology, 82, 32–56. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Segal, G. (1998). Representing representations. In P. Carruthers & J. Boucher (Eds.), Language and thought (pp. 146–161). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Southgate, V., Senju A., & Csibra, G. (2007). Action anticipation through attribution of false belief by 2-year-olds. Psychological Science, 18, 587–92. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Southgate, V. (2013). Early manifestations of mind reading. In S. Baron-Cohen & H. Tager-Flusberg (Eds.), Understanding other minds: Perspectives from developmental social neuroscience (pp. 3–18). Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Speas, M. (2004). Evidentiality, logophoricity and the syntactic representation of pragmatic features. Lingua, 114, 255–276. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stephenson, T. (2007). Towards a theory of subjective meaning (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). MIT.Google Scholar
Sybesma, R. (2007). Whether we Tense-agree overtly or not. Linguistic Inquiry, 38, 580–587. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tager-Flusberg, H., & Joseph, R. (2005). How language facilitates the acquisition of false belief in children with autism. In J. W. Astington & J. A. Baird (Eds.), Why language matters for Theory of Mind (pp. 298–318). Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tanz, C. (1983). Studies in the acquisition of deictic terms. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Thomas, E. (2010). Pronoun differentiation in young children: An eyetracker study (BA honors thesis). Smith College.Google Scholar
Van Cleave, M., & Gauker, C. (2010). Linguistic practice and false belief tasks. Mind & Language, 25, 298–328. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (4)

Cited by four other publications

Serrat, Elisabet, Anna Amadó, Stephanie Durrleman, Alaitz Intxaustegi & Francesc Sidera
2024. Expressive syntax matters for second-order false belief: a study with hearing-impaired children. Frontiers in Communication 9 DOI logo
de Villiers, Jill
2021. With Language in Mind. Language Learning and Development 17:2 ► pp. 71 ff. DOI logo
de Villiers, Jill G.
2021. The Role(s) of Language in Theory of Mind. In The Neural Basis of Mentalizing, ► pp. 423 ff. DOI logo
de Villiers, Jill G. & Jay L. Garfield
2017. Chapter 8. Evidentiality, questions and the reflection principle in Tibetan. In Social Environment and Cognition in Language Development [Trends in Language Acquisition Research, 21], ► pp. 113 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 28 september 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.