Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T10:46:49.141Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Explicitness and predication: A risky linkage

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 October 1999

Andrew Carstairs-McCarthy
Affiliation:
Department of Linguistics, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New [email protected] www.ling.canterbury.ac.nz/adc-m.html

Abstract

Dienes & Perner (D&P) link explicit knowledge of facts to predication. But predication is basically a linguistic notion. Their approach therefore makes it difficult to attribute knowledge of facts to non- language-users, such as animals. The explicit/implicit distinction, as D&P formulate it, is accordingly of little use for exploring the cognitive capacities of nonhuman primates – despite the increasing evidence for sophisticated social awareness among apes, implying mental representations of events in which participants are clearly distinguished. A revised formulation, less biased toward syntax as it happens to have evolved in humans, could avoid this drawback.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Copyright
© 1999 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)