1887
Volume 34, Issue 1
  • ISSN 0929-7332
  • E-ISSN: 1569-9919
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Spatial prepositions express relations between objects in space. A subset of spatial prepositions is ambiguous due to the different perspectives from which these spatial relations can be considered. The ability to consider another person’s perspective is still developing in children. This study investigates how Dutch-speaking children (mean age 10) and adults interpret perspective-dependent spatial prepositions uttered by a speaker. We found that adults took the speaker’s perspective in a third of the cases, whereas children did so in a sixth of the cases. No differences in interpretation emerged between prepositions in assertions and requests, although these different speech acts reflect different speaker intentions. In general, children performed like adults, but less often took the speaker’s perspective with compared to and in assertions. We conclude that 10-year-olds can take another person’s perspective when interpreting spatial prepositions, but, like adults, only do so in a minority of cases.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/avt.34.05huk
2017-11-23
2019-12-15
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Bullens, Jessie , Nina Lienenkämper , Frank Wijnen & Albert Postma
    2013 “Children’s use of spatial reference frames in verbal and non-verbal tasks.” In: Y. Coello & A. Bartolo (Eds.), Language and Action in Cognitive Neuroscience, Hove, East Sussex: Psychology Press, 177–190.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Duran, Nicholas D. , Rick Dale & Roger J. Kreuz
    2011 “Listeners invest in an assumed other’s perspective despite cognitive cost.” Cognition, 121(1), 22–40. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2011.06.009
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2011.06.009 [Google Scholar]
  3. Epley, Nicholas , Carey K. Morewedge & Boaz Keysar
    2004 “Perspective taking in children and adults: Equivalent egocentrism but differential correction.” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 40(6), 760–768. doi: 10.1016/j.jesp.2004.02.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2004.02.002 [Google Scholar]
  4. Flavell, John H. , Barbara Abrahams Everett , Karen Croft & Eleanor R. Flavell
    1981 “Young children’s knowledge about visual perception: Further evidence for the Level 1 – Level 2 distinction.” Developmental Psychology, 17(1), 99–103. doi: 10.1037/0012‑1649.17.1.99
    https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.17.1.99 [Google Scholar]
  5. Greenberg, Anastasia , Buddhika Bellana & Ellen Bialystok
    2013 “Perspective-taking ability in bilingual children: Extending advantages in executive control to spatial reasoning.” Cognitive Development, 28(1), 41–50. doi: 10.1016/j.cogdev.2012.10.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogdev.2012.10.002 [Google Scholar]
  6. Keysar, Boaz , Dale T. Barr , Jennifer A. Balin & Jason S. Brauner 2000 “Taking perspective in conversation: The role of mutual knowledge in comprehension.” Psychological Science, 11(1), 32–38. doi: 10.1111/1467‑9280.00211
    https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9280.00211 [Google Scholar]
  7. Levinson, Stephen C.
    1996 “Frames of reference and Molyneux’s question: Crosslinguistic evidence.” In: P. Bloom & M. Peterson (Eds.), Language and Space. Cambridge, MA: MIT press, 109–169.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. 2003Space in Language and Cognition: Explorations in Cognitive Diversity. Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511613609
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511613609 [Google Scholar]
  9. Michelon, Pascale & Jeffrey M. Zacks
    2006 “Two kinds of visual perspective taking.” Perception & Psychophysics, 68(2), 327–337. doi: 10.3758/BF03193680
    https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193680 [Google Scholar]
  10. Vander Heyden, Karin , Mariette Huizinga , Maartje E. J. Raijmakers & Jelle Jolles
    2017 “Children’s representations of another person’s spatial perspective: Different strategies for different viewpoints?” Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 153, 57–73. doi: 10.1016/j.jecp.2016.09.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2016.09.001 [Google Scholar]
  11. Vanderveken, Daniel
    1998 “On the logical form of illocutionary acts.” In: A. Kasher (Ed.), Pragmatics: Critical Concepts, Volume2, London: Routledge, 170–194.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Tversky, Barbara & Bridgette M. Hard
    2009 “Embodied and disembodied cognition: Spatial perspective-taking.” Cognition, 110(1), 124–129. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2008.10.008
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2008.10.008 [Google Scholar]
  13. Zwarts, Joost & Peter Gärdenfors
    2016 “Locative and directional prepositions in conceptual space: The role of polar convexity.” Journal of Logic, Language and Information, 25, 109–138. doi: 10.1007/s10849‑015‑9224‑5
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s10849-015-9224-5 [Google Scholar]
  14. Zwarts, Joost & Yoad Winter
    2000 “Vector space semantics: A model-theoretic analysis of locative prepositions.” Journal of Logic, Language and Information, 9(2), 169–211. doi: 10.1023/A:1008384416604
    https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008384416604 [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/avt.34.05huk
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/avt.34.05huk
Loading

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error