Iconic and non-iconic stages in number development: the role of language

Abstract

Is language the key to number? This article argues that the human language faculty provides the cognitive equipment that enables humans to develop a systematic number concept.Crucially, this concept is based on non-iconic representations that involve relations be tween relations: relations between numbers are linked with relations between objects. In contrast to this, language-independent numerosity concepts provide only iconic representations. The pattern of forming relations between relations lies at the heart of our language faculty, suggesting that it is language that enables h umans to make the step from these iconic representations, which we share with other species, to a generalised concept of number.

Language in the prediction of arithmetics in kindergarten and grade 1

“…Recently the value of including language as measure has been stressed in the prediction of numeracy development (Heim, Amunts, Drai, Eickhoff, Hautvast, & Grodzinksy, 2012;Purpura et al, 2011;Romano, Babchishin, Pagani, & Kohen, 2010;Sarnecka et al, 2007;Wiese, 2003). Oral language skills include receptive language, expressive language and the understanding of grammatical rules and the structure of language (Purpura et.…”

Are numbers special? An overview of chronometric, neuroimaging, developmental and comparative studies of magnitude representation

“…Human processing of numbers has intrigued researchers from various disciplines such as anthropology (Urton and Brezine, 2005), linguistics (Gordon, 2004;Pica et al, 2004;Wiese, 2003), psychology (Gallistel and Gelman, 1992;Gelman and Butterworth, 2005;Moyer and Landauer, 1967), and cognitive neuroscience (Brannon, 2006;Dehaene et al, 2003;Fias et al, 2003;Nieder, 2005). Previous reviews focused on the question whether the same representation exists for different notations of numbers (i.e., the issue of abstract numerical representation; Brannon, 2006;Dehaene et al, 1998).…”

The role of vision in the development of finger–number interactions: Finger-counting and finger-montring in blind children

“…Developmental and cross-cultural studies have indeed shown that children use their fingers early in life while learning basic arithmetic operations and the conventional sequence of counting words (Butterworth, 1999b). More particular, fingers have been found to contribute to (a) giving an iconic representation of numbers (Fayol & Seron, 2005), (b) keeping track of the number words uttered while counting up or down at the numerable chain level (Fuson et al, 1982), (c) prompting the understanding that every symbolic number is a sum and/or a multiple of 10 (the base 10 numerical system) and that 10 is equal to 2 Â 5 (the sub-base 5 system), (d) sustaining the induction of the one-to-one correspondence principle (Graham, 1999) by helping children to coordinate the act of tagging the object with saying the number word (Alibali & DiRusso, 1999;Fuson, 1988), and (e) sustaining the assimilation of the stable-order principle by supporting the emergence of a routine to link fingers to objects in a sequential culture-specific stable order (Wiese, 2003a(Wiese, , 2003b.…”

“…Interestingly, these abilities are assumed to rest in the parietal cortex, a brain area that is often associated with the dorsal visual pathway. Furthermore, because finger-counting and finger-montring habits are culturally determined (e.g., European children start counting with a closed fist and unbend one finger after the other, whereas Chinese children start counting with an open hand and bend one finger after the other [Butterworth, 1999b;Ifrah, 1981;Wiese, 2003a;Wiese, 2003b]), the question arises as to whether vision is critical or not for the elaboration of these interactions. The study of congenitally blind children represents a unique opportunity to investigate this issue.…”

“…Third, do blind children use their fingers in the same way as their sighted peers when they are explicitly required to count and to show quantities with their fingers (in the third test battery)? Given that canonical finger-digit configurations are culture dependent (Butterworth, 1999b;Ifrah, 1981;Wiese, 2003aWiese, , 2003b, vision was expected to play a critical role in the acquisition (by imitation) of these canonical configurations.…”