Many writers have made a convincing case
for a causal role of language in the development of a mature ToM (Astington & Baird,
2005). However, there are at least three distinct arguments for why language should matter and good empirical evidence for each one.
1. Content of ToM-Even with respect to children developing an understanding of their own feelings or desires or thoughts, it seems necessary to hear language used about them in order to learn how to express those concepts in our culture. We learn the words that label such private events by hearing others talk about and interpret our inner worlds, but we begin to bring these together into causal webs that constitute our first primitive psychological theories (Dunn & Brophy, 2005; Nelson, 2005). This approach to ToM development, therefore, focuses on the importance of learning words as labels for mental states that may not be directly observable in behavior.
2. Role of language in ToM development concerns the information that conversation itself contains (Appleton & Reddy, 1996; Harris, 2005; Peterson & Siegal, 1999; Wellman & Peterson, 2013b). Beyond the content of discussions about the mind and behavior, every conversation, even a mundane one about breakfast, is a window into the beliefs and desires of other people. Language exposes people’s knowledge or ignorance, our beliefs, our attitudes, and our differences, even when they are implicit and not directly expressed. Therefore, probable that the information about minds conveyed through conversation is richer than that conveyed through behavior, eye gaze, or gestural expression of feelings and desires.
3. A third class of theories emphasizes the role played by the child’s own language mastery rather than the information contained in the input language or conversational interaction (Astington & Jenkins, 1999; de Villiers & de Villiers, 2009; Milligan, Astington, & Dack, 2007).A child with the capacity to express someone’s mistaken belief can then use that representation to reason about what the other person might do next, or why the person had that belief.
The evidence that language development is closely intertwined with ToM development is strong, and the connections are multidirectional (de Villiers, 2007). The earliest stages of communication depend on the infant’s interest in and engagement with other social beings with minds, and it is through these interactions that children begin to learn words and meanings.It is through this greater comprehension, and the parallel development in metalinguistic skills, that children become capable of really understanding, and using, nonliteral language, such as jokes, metaphors, irony, sarcasm, and lies (de Villiers, de Villiers, ColesWhite, & Carpenter, 2009; Happe, 1995; ´ Tager-Flusberg, 2000). A mature ToM thus feeds into these later pragmatic language developments.
1. Content of ToM-Even with respect to children developing an understanding of their own feelings or desires or thoughts, it seems necessary to hear language used about them in order to learn how to express those concepts in our culture. We learn the words that label such private events by hearing others talk about and interpret our inner worlds, but we begin to bring these together into causal webs that constitute our first primitive psychological theories (Dunn & Brophy, 2005; Nelson, 2005). This approach to ToM development, therefore, focuses on the importance of learning words as labels for mental states that may not be directly observable in behavior.
2. Role of language in ToM development concerns the information that conversation itself contains (Appleton & Reddy, 1996; Harris, 2005; Peterson & Siegal, 1999; Wellman & Peterson, 2013b). Beyond the content of discussions about the mind and behavior, every conversation, even a mundane one about breakfast, is a window into the beliefs and desires of other people. Language exposes people’s knowledge or ignorance, our beliefs, our attitudes, and our differences, even when they are implicit and not directly expressed. Therefore, probable that the information about minds conveyed through conversation is richer than that conveyed through behavior, eye gaze, or gestural expression of feelings and desires.
3. A third class of theories emphasizes the role played by the child’s own language mastery rather than the information contained in the input language or conversational interaction (Astington & Jenkins, 1999; de Villiers & de Villiers, 2009; Milligan, Astington, & Dack, 2007).A child with the capacity to express someone’s mistaken belief can then use that representation to reason about what the other person might do next, or why the person had that belief.
The evidence that language development is closely intertwined with ToM development is strong, and the connections are multidirectional (de Villiers, 2007). The earliest stages of communication depend on the infant’s interest in and engagement with other social beings with minds, and it is through these interactions that children begin to learn words and meanings.It is through this greater comprehension, and the parallel development in metalinguistic skills, that children become capable of really understanding, and using, nonliteral language, such as jokes, metaphors, irony, sarcasm, and lies (de Villiers, de Villiers, ColesWhite, & Carpenter, 2009; Happe, 1995; ´ Tager-Flusberg, 2000). A mature ToM thus feeds into these later pragmatic language developments.
