paris - july 2007discourse – external referents esf- metacognition 1 discourse and external...
TRANSCRIPT
Paris - July 2007 Discourse – External ReferentsESF- Metacognition
1
Discourse and External Anchors in
Developmental Thought
Josef Perner
Austria
Financial Support:
Paris - July 2007 Discourse – External ReferentsESF- Metacognition
2
In collaboration with
Johannes Brandl — Philosophy Salzburg
Martin Doherty — Psychology Sterling
Alan Garnham — Psychology Sussex
Bibiane Rendl — Psychology Salzburg
Manuel Sprung — Psychology S. Mississippi Innsbruck
Gabi Waidmann — Psychology Salzburg
Inspirations by: Mike Martin
Paris - July 2007 Discourse – External ReferentsESF- Metacognition
3
Referential Expressions
Russell’s Problem
Referential expressions are expressions that refer to something.
What do referential terms refer to? “Napoleon B.”
“The King of France”
“The present King of France” ?
Louis XIII
Louis XIV
?
Paris - July 2007 Discourse – External ReferentsESF- Metacognition
4
Referential Expressions
Russell’s Theory of Description
There are more or less no referential descriptions but existential claims: “The present king of France is bald” RTD: x (y (Ky x = y) & Bx)
which captures: At least one thing is K (present King of France) At most one thing is K Whatever is K is B (bald).
Paris - July 2007 Discourse – External ReferentsESF- Metacognition
5
Referential Expressions
Problems with Russell
The existential interpretation makes it difficult to integrate information from different sentences in a text.
The present King of France is bald. The present King of France uses NANO*shampoo. These are two false sentences (full stop). No sense that
we are talking, within a story, about the same entity.
* nicotinic acid N-Oxide
Paris - July 2007 Discourse – External ReferentsESF- Metacognition
6
Escaping Russell
Intentional objects as referents
Discourse Referents (Karttunen, 1976) Discourse Referents as Hubs for Information
Integration: Discourse Representation Theory DRT (Kamp &
Reily, 1995) Discourse Referents as File Cards:
File Change Semantics (Heim, 2002):
Paris - July 2007 Discourse – External ReferentsESF- Metacognition
7
1
is a womanwas bitten by 2
2
is a dogbit 1jumped over 3
3
is a fencewas jumped over by 2
+
(a) A woman was bitten by a dog. (b) It jumped over a fence.
Integrating Information within a story
File Change Semantics: Heim's Example
Paris - July 2007 Discourse – External ReferentsESF- Metacognition
8
Integrating information within a story Separation of “what is talked about” (DR) from “what is said
about it” (info on DR): cross reference by DR#s. Reference within story:
Descriptions on card Relating story to the world
External anchors Reference to external objects: anchoring conditions
Perspective relative talk Defining labels put a “perspective” on the external referent
This mouse is big This animal is small
4 Functions of discourse referents
Paris - July 2007 Discourse – External ReferentsESF- Metacognition
9
#1
:= a mouseis BIG …
cond: is a mouse,on this display, looks like:
Discourse referents
Refinements
DR-identifier
Defining label (name): sets perspectivediscourse reference
Attributive information: interpreted in relation to perspective of label
Discourse referent (DR)
Anchoring conditions (formal anchors): determine external referent (anchor)
external referent (external anchor)
Paris - July 2007 Discourse – External ReferentsESF- Metacognition
10
Discourse referent = mental referent
Discourse referents are mental entities required for understanding discourse
hence their name But really they are “intentional objects”
(thought-of objects) Also required for any kind of thinking that goes
beyond perception (maybe even there).
NOT intrinsically tied to language
Paris - July 2007 Discourse – External ReferentsESF- Metacognition
11
Purpose of all this
Explaining difficulties with alternative naming
Paris - July 2007 Discourse – External ReferentsESF- Metacognition
12
Alternative Naming (Doherty & Perner 1998): Vocabulary check
Where is the “bunny?”
Where is the “cup?”
Where is the “rabbit?”
Paris - July 2007 Discourse – External ReferentsESF- Metacognition
13
Puppet, what’s this?
[Name of child], now you say the other name!
It is a rabbit
It is a bunny
Alternative Naming: Synonyms
Children have difficulties until they are about 4½ years old (see Perner et al., 2002)
Paris - July 2007 Discourse – External ReferentsESF- Metacognition
14
Alternative Names: Name-Name (NN)
Synonyms
Bunny - Rabbit
Categories
Fruit - Pear
Paris - July 2007 Discourse – External ReferentsESF- Metacognition
15
Control Conditions
Name - Colour
Cup - Red
Colour - Colour
Yellow - Green
Name - Part
Monkey - Tail
Part - Part
Head - Tail
Paris - July 2007 Discourse – External ReferentsESF- Metacognition
16
Results: Children’s Performance ctd.
Paris - July 2007 Discourse – External ReferentsESF- Metacognition
22
External anchor
Alternative Naming: NN Control: CC"This is a mouse.“ “This is green.”"This is an animal.“ “This is yellow.”
#2
:= an animalis small …
cond:
#1
:= a mouseis BIG …
cond:
#1
:= a ballis part yellow is part green
cond:
Paris - July 2007 Discourse – External ReferentsESF- Metacognition
23
This is “meta-cognitive” “meta-representational”
information:
“DR #2, and DR #1 havesame external referent”
External anchor
Alternative Naming: NN"This is a mouse.“"This is an animal.“
#2
cond:
:= an animalis small …
info: same as #1
#1
cond:
:= a mouseis BIG …
info: same as #2
Paris - July 2007 Discourse – External ReferentsESF- Metacognition
24
The developmental claim
Around 4 years (3 – 5 years) children attain the necessary metarepresentational ability to represent identity: info Younger than 4 tend to fail altertive naming Older than 4 tend to pass alternative naming
Prediction: Same age trend for understanding identity
statements
Paris - July 2007 Discourse – External ReferentsESF- Metacognition
25
2 Important Points
The Anchoring Info constitutes “meta-cognitive” / “meta-representational”
information: “DR #2, and DR #1 have same external referent”
It provides an explicit encoding of identity The Anchoring Conditions
provide a sort of implicit understanding of identity as it anchors the two DRs to the same external entity.
Paris - July 2007 Discourse – External ReferentsESF- Metacognition
26
Important distinctions
Types of information: Defining (identifying) label Attributive information
Referents Discourse referent DR External referent ER
#1
:= a mouseis BIG …
cond: is a mouse,on this display, …
DR
ER
Paris - July 2007 Discourse – External ReferentsESF- Metacognition
27
Understanding Identity
A prediction tested
Paris - July 2007 Discourse – External ReferentsESF- Metacognition
28
This is the nurse.
This jewel belongs to Susi’s mother.
Susi’s mother is the nurse.
Prediction: Problems with identity statements
1 a nurse
2
a jewelbelongs to 3
3
Susi’s momowns 2
info: same as 1
Give back the jewel!
?
Paris - July 2007 Discourse – External ReferentsESF- Metacognition
29
Identity story (Waidmann): Results
0
20
40
60
80
100
young n = 13 older n = 15
FB ID
Percent
correct
r = .77 ** rp= .48** rp= .24
KABC Age
False Belief
Identity condition
0 1 2
0 8 0 0
1 5 0 0
2 3 0 12
Paris - July 2007 Discourse – External ReferentsESF- Metacognition
30
This is the nurse.
This dog belongs to the nurse
This collar belongsto the dog
Control: no problems with inferences
2 a dogbelongs to 1
Give back the collar! give 3 to 1 (the nurse)
3
a collarbelongs to 2
1
a nurse
Reasoning: If 3 belongs to 22 belongs to 1
then 3 belongs to 1
Paris - July 2007 Discourse – External ReferentsESF- Metacognition
31
0
20
40
60
80
Number children
Understand Erratic Sys-wrong
Kind of Response
Best Estimate of Percent Children who Understood
IC
ID
FB
Results: Bibiane Rendl
3;3n=11
0,0
0,5
1,0
1,5
2,0
Mea
n c
orr
ect
nu
mb
er o
f te
st q
ues
tio
ns
Age group
123IC
ID
FB
3;8n=14
4;1n=15
4;5n=14
Inference control
Identity task
False belief task
Paris - July 2007 Discourse – External ReferentsESF- Metacognition
32
Instructive Pitfalls
Uncovered by using file cards
Paris - July 2007 Discourse – External ReferentsESF- Metacognition
33
This is the nurse.
This jewel belongs
to Susi’s mother.
Susi’s mother
is the nurse.
1 a nurse
2
a jewelbelongs to 3
3
Susi’s momowns 2
is a nurse
Give back the jewel!
?
Pitfalls uncovered by file cards: Attributive “is”
Attributive interpretation
Susi’s mom Nurse
Paris - July 2007 Discourse – External ReferentsESF- Metacognition
34
Avoiding attributive interpretations of identity statements
1
a nurselost 2
2
a jewelbelongs to 1
The nurse lost her jewel.
Susi’s sister is the nurse.
3
Susi’s sister
is a nurse
info: same as 1
A man finds the jewel. Who should he give it to— ?
Here are Susi and her sister. 4
Susi
?
Paris - July 2007 Discourse – External ReferentsESF- Metacognition
36
Summary: theoretical analysis
Discourse Coherence intentional objects as referents (discourse referents)
Discourse about reality Internal (intentional/discourse) vs. external referents
Implicit identity: DRs anchored to same ER Explicit identity: representing that DRs share same ER (a
case of metarepresentation). Standard means of internal referring: labels
Labels enable use of Perspectival simplification
(“big” vs. “big for a <label>”) Default assumptions (birds fly, penguins don’t)
Paris - July 2007 Discourse – External ReferentsESF- Metacognition
37
Summary: development
Metarepresentation develops around 4 years Children below 4 years fail metarepresentational
tasks: Alternative naming Identity statements Many others: false belief, visual perspective, …
File-card analysis provides Processing account of task difficulty
Paris - July 2007 Discourse – External ReferentsESF- Metacognition
38
Future agenda
Can we fit the following into the developmental picture? Piaget’s class inclusion task: “More boys or
children?” Piaget’s seriation tasks: identity of the middle term Doherty’s Rejection Task (extension of alternative
naming) How do Discourse Referents relate to Mental
Models?
Paris - July 2007 Discourse – External ReferentsESF- Metacognition
39
References Discourse ReferentsPerner, J., Rendl, B., & Garnham, A. (in press). "Objects of desire, thought, and
reality: Problems of anchoring discourse referents in development." Mind & Language, Vol, pp-pp.
Perner, J., & Brandl, J. (2005). File change semantics for preschoolers: alternative naming and belief understanding. Interaction Studies, 6(3), 483-501. 501.
Alternative Naming and False Belief:Perner, J., Brandl, J., & Garnham, A. (2003). What is a perspective problem?
Developmental issues in understanding belief and dual identity. Facta Philosophica, 5, 355-378.
Perner, J., Stummer, S., Sprung, M. & Doherty, M. J. (2002). Theory of mind finds its Piagetian Perspective: Why alternative naming comes with understanding belief. Cognitive Development, 17, 1451–1472.
Perner, J. (2000). RUM, PUM, and the perspectival relativity of sortals. In J. Astington (Ed.). Minds in the making: Essays in honour of David R. Olson (212-232). Oxford: Blackwell.
Doherty, M. J. & Perner, J. (1998). Metalinguistic awareness and theory of mind: just two words for the same thing? Cognitive Development, 13, 279-305.
Card SortingKloo, D. & Perner, J. (2005). Disentangling Dimensions in the Dimensional
Change Card Sorting task. Developmental Science, 8, 44-56.