Theory of Mind in Clarifying Dialogue: Inferring Another Person's Interpretation from Relational History

Clarifying dialogue can supply evidence about another person's interpretation while changing the interpretation being investigated. This paper develops a relational-history account of the resulting inference problem. It separates current coordination, retrospective attribution, and the prospective formation of understanding, while treating relations, histories, interpretive conditions, and response profiles as jointly constrained. A finite model retains paired initial and current candidate states through inquiry-induced transitions. Exact recovery of an earlier target requires constancy across the initial histories compatible with the complete dialogue transcript. A bounded adaptive-inquiry recursion characterizes when an allowed sequence of questions can achieve that recovery, and a constructive example shows how successful explanation can erase the discriminating opportunity while securing present mastery. Further examples distinguish historical ambiguity, response ambiguity, contextual error, and participants' interpretations of an investigator's expectations. The philosophical analysis connects first-person authority, interpersonal understanding, and the formation of shared meaning without identifying predictive success with access to another person's experience. A proposed study separates immediate correct responding, transfer, and retrospective attribution. The results are conditional formal consequences and conceptual distinctions; their psychological adequacy and the comparative merits of the proposed inquiry procedure remain empirical questions.