1Psych 56L/ Ling 51:Acquisition of LanguageLecture 15Language & Cognition +Childhood BilingualismAnnouncementsReminder: Please complete your course evaluationsReminder: No class on Wednesday, 11/26/08Reminder: HW3 due Monday, 12/1/08Please pick up your HW1, HW2, and/or midterm if youhave not yet done soDifferent Whorfian QuestionsLanguage as a Category Maker: Does the language we acquireinfluence where we make our category distinctions?Language as a Lens: Do grammatical characteristics of alanguage shape speakers’ perceptions of the world?Language as a Toolkit: Does language augment our capacity forreasoning and representation?NumberCore number systems shared by humans and other animals:System for representing approximate numerical magnitudes(large, approximate number sense)System for representing persistent, numerically distinct individuals(small, exact number sense)2Decide Fast:How Many?3How We Deal With NumberCombo of 2 above systemsplus languageLarge exactnumerositiesSystem for representingapproximate numericalmagnitudesLarge approximatenumerosities“Subitizing”- up to 4; can tellwhat set looks likeVery smallnumbersHow RepresentedAmount BeingRepresentedWhat human language does…Many languages have an exact number system that providesnames for exact quantities of any size1, 2, 3, 4, 5…….578, 579, 580, 581, 582…This bridges the “gap” between the two core systems.Testing this: Look at numerical cognition of people whoselanguages don’t have an exact number system.4Languages without Exact Number SystemsPica, Lemer, Izard & Dehaene (2004): Munduruku speakers inBrazil who only have exact numbers for 1-5. When doingsimple tasks like addition and subtraction with numbersoutside this range (ex: 8-6), they do much worse thanspeakers who have an exact number system (though stillbetter than chance).Gorndon (2004): Pirahã speakers in Brazil who only havewords for “one/two” and “many”. Exact arithmetic on largernumbers that are both outside the small, exact system andoutside the language is very, very hard to do.Gelman & Gallistel (2004)“Language and the Origin of Numerical Concepts”“Reports of subjects who appear indifferent to exact numericalquality even for small numbers, and who also do not countverbally, add weight to the idea that learning a communicablenumber notation with exact numerical reference may play a rolein the emergence of a fully formed conception of number.”No language for large exact numbers =no representation for large exact numbersLanguage as a Toolkit: Theory of MindSarah thought that Hoggle had betrayed her.The embedded proposition encodes the contents of Sarah’s mind.The ‘truth value’ of the embedded proposition cannot be evaluatedwith respect to this world. It must be evaluated with respect toSarah’s mental world.What if a child didn’t know this?5What You Need to Know To Evaluate the TruthValue of These StatementsSyntactic Knowledge: you know that some verbs can takesentential complements (think, believe, say, …)Social Cognitive Knowledge: you know that other people can havea false beliefBridge: you know that there is a connection between this syntacticform and the expression of potentially false beliefsWhich comes first, social or syntactic knowledge? Usual Pattern: Social/Conceptual ---> Linguistic Whorfian: Linguistic ---> Social/ConceptualA Leeetle Problem…How do you measure children’s understanding that other peoplecan have false beliefs?(abstracted away from their linguistic ability to represent falsebeliefs)False Belief TaskThe child is introduced to two puppets, Sir Didymus and Ambrosius.Sir Didymus AmbrosiusFalse Belief TaskWhile playing, Sir Didymus puts a marble into a bin and then goes outside (thepuppet disappears under the table, for example).binmarble6False Belief TaskWhile playing, Sir Didymus puts a marble into a bin and then goes outside (thepuppet disappears under the table, for example).False Belief TaskWhen Sir Didymus is not around, naughty Ambrosius changes thelocation of the marble. He takes it out of the bin and puts it in adifferent bin.False Belief TaskSome time later Sir Didymus comes back and wants to play withhis marble. Children are then asked the critical question: Wherewill Sir Didymus look for his marble?False Belief TaskSome time later Sir Didymus comes back and wants to play withhis marble. Children are then asked the critical question: Wherewill Sir Didymus look for his marble?3-year olds &autistic children4 to 5-year oldsCorrect Incorrect7If we’re looking for a language connection…At what age do children start talking about thoughts/beliefs? Atwhat age do children first begin to use sentential complements?2-year-olds talk a lot!... about what they did, what they want... about what others do... possibly about what others say– not about what others thinkIf we’re looking for a language connection…At what age do children start talking about thoughts/beliefs? Atwhat age do children first begin to use sentential complements?Children’s comprehension of sentential complements“Sir Didymus said he bought peaches. But look! He really boughtoranges. What did Sir Didymus say he bought?”3-year-olds: oranges (reality, not mental state)4-year-olds: peaches (key into “say that”)If we’re looking for a language connection…At what age do children start talking about thoughts/beliefs? Atwhat age do children first begin to use sentential complements?At around four years of age, children understand that mental verbscan take a whole sentence in their scope (a complement)Sir Didymus thought that the shampoo was the toothpaste.And the embedded sentence can be FALSE from the child’sPoint of View, but TRUE for Sir Didymus.Once the child has this capacity, he can represent two worlds:his own, and someone else’s mental world.This usually coincides with children’s production of mental stateverbs.Testing typically developing childrenDe Villiers & Pyers (2002): Measures of comprehension andproduction of sentential complements far more correlated withchildren’s performance on false belief tasks than any otherlinguistic measure.Causation? “In every case, children who passed false beliefs gaveus evidence that they had productive command ofcomplementation.”Learning Trajectory: Easier to observe what people say than whatthey think. Can get more helpful data with communicationverbs that take sentential complements (like say), and thenextend that by analogy to mental verbs