Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-31T15:38:28.740Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Four-year olds' understanding of pretend and forget: no evidence for propositional reasoning*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 September 2008

Suzanne E. Hidi  and
Angela Hildyard
Suzanne E. Hidi
Affiliation:
Ontario Institute for Studies in Education Toronto
Angela Hildyard
Affiliation:
Ontario Institute for Studies in Education Toronto
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

It is argued in this paper that 4-year-old children do not perform logical operations corresponding to formal logic upon the sentential components of implicative verbs to produce the indirect implications, as was suggested by Macnamara, Baker & Olson (1976). First, it is shown that the indirect implications tested by Macnamara et al. are not the implications which would be derived on the basis of formal reasoning. Second, additional empirical evidence is presented to show that when children hear a story containing a sentence with an implicative verb they do not combine the sentential components of that implicative verb (i.e. the presuppositions and implicative) to arrive at the implication of their conjunction. It is argued that the children draw upon their past personal knowledge concerning the event described in the story and import additional premises where necessary in order to derive the indirect implications.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Child Language , Volume 6 , Issue 3 , October 1979 , pp. 493 - 510
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1979

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.)

Footnotes

[*]

Address for correspondence: Dr. A. Hildyard, Research & Development, O.I.S.E., 252 Bloor St. West, Toronto, Canada M5S IV6.

References

REFERENCES

Bereiter, C. & Hidi, S. (1977). Biconditional vs. factual reasoning in children. Toronto: OISE. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service Number ED 138 351.)Google Scholar
Brown, A. (1976). Semantic integration in children's reconstruction of narrative sequences. CogPsych 8. 247–62.Google Scholar
Carnap, R. (1956). Meaning and necessity (2nd edn). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Cohen, M. R. & Nagel, E. (1962). An introduction to logic. New York: Harcourt, Brace & World.Google Scholar
Copi, J. M. (1972). Introduction to logic (4th edn). New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Grice, H. P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In Cole, P. & Morgan, J. L. (eds), Syntax and semantics. Vol. 3: Speech Acts. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Keenan, E. L. (1971). Two kinds of presupposition in natural language. In Fillmore, C. J. & Langendoen, D. T. (eds), Studies in linguistic semantics. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Google Scholar
Inhelder, B. & Piaget, J. (1958). The growth of logic and thinking from childhood to adolescence. New York: Basic Books.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Macnamara, J. (1977). Children's command of the logic of conversation. In Macnamara, J. (ed.), Language, learning and thought. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Macnamara, J., Baker, E. & Olson, C. L.(1976). Four-year-olds' understanding of pretend, forget and know: evidence for propositional operations. ChDev 47. 62–70.Google Scholar
McNemar, Q. (1969). Psychological statistics (4th edn). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Olson, D. R. & Hildyard, A. (in press). Literacy and the specialization of language: some aspects of the comprehension and thought processes of literate and non-literate children and adults. In Warren, N. (ed.), Cross-cultural studies in psychology, Vol. II. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Olson, D. R. & Nickerson, N. G. 1979. Language development through the school years in Nelson, K. E. (ed.), Children's language, Vol. I. New York: Gardner Press.Google Scholar
Papert, S. (1977). Testing for propositional logic. In Macnamara, J. (ed.), Language, learning and thought. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Paris, S. G. & Upton, L. R. (1976). Children's memory for inferential relationships in prose. ChDev 47. 660–8.Google Scholar
Piaget, J. (1928). Judgement and reasoning in the child. In collaboration with E. Cartalis and others. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Piaget, J. (1959). The language and thought of the child (3rd edn). London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Scribner, S. (1975). Recall of classical syllogisms: a cross-cultural investigation of error on logical problems. In Falmagne, R. J. (ed.), Reasoning: representation and process. Hillsdale, N. J.: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Stein, N. L. & Glenn, C. G. 1979. An analysis of story comprehension in elementary school children. In Freedle, R. (ed.), Discourse processing: multidisciplinary perspectives, Vol. II. Hillsdale, N.J.: Ablex.Google Scholar
Van Fraassen, B. C. (1968). Presupposition, implication and self-reference. J Philos 86. 136–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar