Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
What underlies children's naming of representations, such as when they call a statue of a clothespin “a clothespin”? One possibility is that they focus exclusively on shape, extending the name “clothespin” only to entities that are shaped like typical clothespins. An alternative possibility is that they extend a word that refers to an object to any representation of that object, and that shape is relevant because it is a reliable indicator of representational intent. We explored these possibilities by asking 3- and 4-year-olds to describe pictures that represented objects through intention and analogy. The results suggest that it is children's appreciation of representation that underlies their naming; sameness of shape is neither necessary nor sufficient. We conclude by considering whether this account might apply more generally to artifacts other than pictorial representations.
Bloom et al. (Fri,) studied this question.