Is prediction necessary to understand language? Probably not

Some recent theoretical accounts in the cognitive sciences suggest that prediction is necessary to understand language. Here we evaluate this proposal. We consider arguments that prediction provides a unified theoretical principle of the human mind and that it pervades cortical function. We discuss whether evidence of human abilities to detect statistical regularities is necessarily evidence for predictive processing and evaluate suggestions that prediction is necessary for language learning. We point out that not all language users appear to predict language and that suboptimal input makes prediction often very challenging. Prediction, moreover, is strongly context-dependent and impeded by resource limitations. We also argue that it may be problematic that most experimental evidence for predictive language processing comes from prediction-encouraging experimental set-ups. We conclude that languages can be learned and understood in the absence of prediction. Claims that all language processing is predictive in nature are premature.