Mental state terms are believed to be closely related to the development of Theory of Mind (ToM). This study focuses on mental state verbs (MSVs) and investigates how they are used by Japanese-speaking mother–child dyads compared to their English-speaking counterparts. Analyses of their spontaneous speech from the CHILDES archives show that children’s production of MSVs is greatly influenced by the mothers’ input in both languages and that Japanese MSVs are used less frequently than English MSVs in both the children’s and mothers’ utterances. In addition, the syntactic properties of MSVs show that complements under MSVs tend to be null in Japanese, whereas those in English are more likely to be overtly expressed. This difference observed in the mothers’ input and children’s production can be a contributing factor underlying the developmental delay of ToM in Japanese.
AdrianJ. E.ClementeR. A.VillanuevaL.RieffeC. (2005). Parent–child picture-book reading, mothers’ mental state language and children’s theory of mind. Journal of Child Language, 32(3), 673–686.
2.
Baron-CohenS.LeslieA. M.FrithU. (1985). Does the autistic child have a ‘theory of mind’?Cognition, 21(1), 37–46.
3.
BartschK.WellmanH. M. (1995). Children talk about the mind. New York: Oxford University Press.
4.
BeeghlyM.BrethertonI.MervisC. B. (1986). Mothers’ internal state language to toddlers. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 4(3), 247–260.
5.
BrethertonI.BeeghlyM. (1982). Talking about internal states: The acquisition of an explicit theory of mind. Developmental Psychology, 18(6), 906–921.
6.
de VilliersJ. G. (1995). Questioning minds and answering machines. Proceedings of the Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development, 19, 20–36.
7.
de VilliersJ. G. (2000). Language and theory of mind: What are the developmental relationships? In Baron-CohenS.Tager-FlusbergH.CohenD. J. (Eds.), Understanding other minds: Perspectives from developmental cognitive neuroscience (pp. 83–123). New York: Oxford University Press.
8.
de VilliersJ. G. (2005). Can language acquisition give children a point of view? In AstingtonJ. W.BairdJ. A. (Eds.), Why language matters for theory of mind (pp. 186–219). New York: Oxford University Press.
9.
de VilliersJ. G.de VilliersP. A. (2009). Complements enable representation of the contents of false belief: Evolution of a theory. In Foster-CohenS. (Ed.), Language acquisition (pp. 169–195). Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
10.
de VilliersJ. G.PyersJ. E. (2002). Complements to cognition: A longitudinal study of the relationship between complex syntax and false-belief-understanding. Cognitive Development, 17(1), 1037–1060.
11.
DunnJ. (1996). Family conversations and the development of social understanding. In BernsteinB.BrannenJ. (Eds.), Children, research and policy: Essays for Barbara Tizard (pp. 81–95). London, UK: Taylor & Francis.
12.
DunnJ.BrownJ.SlomkowskiC.TeslaC.YoungbladeL. M. (1991). Young children’s understanding of other people’s feelings and beliefs: Individual differences and their antecedents. Child Development, 62(6), 1352–1366.
13.
GleasonJ. B. (1980). The acquisition of social speech and politeness formulae. In GilesH.RobinsonW. P.SmithP. M. (Eds.), Language: Social psychological perspectives (pp. 21–27). Oxford, UK: Pergamon.
14.
GopnikA.MeltzoffA. N. (1986). Relations between semantic and cognitive development in the one-word stage: The specificity hypothesis. Child Development, 57(4), 1040–1053.
15.
HaleC. M.Tager-FlusbergH. (2003). The influence of language on theory of mind: A training study. Developmental Science, 6(3), 346–359.
16.
KoyasuM. (2013). Sooron: Ima naze ‘Kokoro no Riron’ o Manabu no ka [Why Theory of Mind should be studied now: An introduction]. Hattatsu [Development], 34, 2–8.
17.
KristenS.ChiarellaS.SodianB.AureliT.GencoM.Poulin-DuboisD. (2014). Crosslinguistic developmental consistency in the composition of toddlers’ internal state vocabulary: Evidence from four languages. Child Development Research, 2014, Article 575142.
18.
LohmannH.TomaselloM. (2003). The role of language in the development of false belief understanding: A training study. Child Development, 74(4), 1130–1144.
19.
MacWhinneyB. (2000). The CHILDES project: Tools for analyzing talk. Nahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
20.
MeinsE.FernyhoughC.WainwrightR.Clark-CarterD.DasGuptaM.FradleyE.TuckeyM. (2003). Pathways to understanding mind: Construct validity and predictive validity of maternal mind-mindedness. Child Development, 74(4), 1194–1211.
21.
MeinsE.FernyhoughC.WainwrightR.Das GuptaM.FradleyE.TuckeyM. (2002). Maternal mind-mindedness and attachment security as predictors of theory of mind understanding. Child Development, 73(6), 1715–1726.
22.
NaitoM.KoyamaK. (2006). The development of false-belief understanding in Japanese children: Delay and difference?International Journal of Behavioral Development, 30(4), 290–304.
23.
OkayamaY. (1970). Haha to ko no taiwa no shuuroku [A collection of mother–child conversations]. Osaka, Japan: Yasuda Seimei Shakaizigyoodan.
24.
OkayamaY. (1973). Haha to ko no taiwa no shuuroku [A collection of mother–child conversations]. Osaka, Japan: Yasuda Seimei Shakaizigyoodan.
25.
Oshima-TakaneY.MacWhinneyB.ShiraiH.MiyataS.NakaN. (Eds.) (1998). CHILDES for Japanese (2nd ed., The JCHAT Project). Chukyo University.
26.
PesetskyD. (1991). Zero syntax (Vol. 2, Unpublished manuscript).
27.
PineJ. (1992). How referential are ‘referential’ children? Relationships between maternal-report and observational measures of vocabulary composition and usage. Journal of Child Language, 19(1), 75–86.
28.
PremackD.WoodruffG. (1978). Does the chimpanzee have a theory of mind?Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 1(4), 515–526.
29.
QuineW. V. O. (1961). From a logical point of view (2nd ed.). New York: Harper & Row.
30.
RuffmanT.SladeL.CroweE. (2002). The relation between children’s and mothers’ mental state language and theory-of-mind understanding. Child Development, 73(3), 734–751.
31.
ShatzM.WellmanH. M.SilberS. (1983). The acquisition of mental verbs: A systematic investigation of the first reference to mental state. Cognition, 14(3), 301–321.
32.
ShiraiY.MiyataS.NakaN.SakazakiY. (2001). The acquisition of causative morphology in Japanese: A prototype account. In NakayamaM. (Ed.), Issues in East Asian language acquisition (pp. 183–203). Tokyo, Japan: Kuroshio.
33.
SlaughterV.PetersonC. C.CarpenterM. (2009). Maternal mental state talk and infants’ early gestural communication. Journal of Child Language, 36(5), 1053–1074.
34.
SlaughterV.PetersonC. C.MackintoshE. (2007). Mind what mother says: Narrative input and Theory of Mind in typical children and those on the autism spectrum. Child Development, 78(3), 839–858.
35.
TaumoepeauM.RuffmanT. (2006). Mother and infant talk about mental states relates to desire language and emotion understanding. Child Development, 77(2), 465–481.
36.
TsujiH. (2011). Development of mentalizing ability in Japanese children. Psychological Studies, 56, 167–175.
37.
TsujiH.DohertyM. (2014). Early development of metalinguistic awareness in Japanese: Evidence from pragmatic and phonological aspects of language. First Language, 34(3), 273–290.
38.
WellmanH. M.CrossD.WatsonJ. (2001). Meta-analysis of theory-of-mind development: The truth about false belief. Child Development, 72(3), 655–684.
39.
WellmanH. M.WoolleyJ. D. (1990). From simple desires to ordinary beliefs: The early development of everyday psychology. Cognition, 35(1), 245–275.
40.
WimmerH.PernerJ. (1983). Beliefs about beliefs: Representation and constraining function of wrong beliefs in young children’s understanding of deception. Cognition, 13(1), 103–128.
