Scaling up Predictive Processing to language with Construction Grammar

A Model Solution: On the Compatibility of Predictive Processing and Embodied Cognition

“…The trouble is that a wide, and largely distinct, array of terms have been applied within discussions of PP and EC, and not always in wholly consistent ways. For example, while some have suggested that PP is a unifying "theory" (Hohwy, 2013;Litwin and Milkowski 2021), others have contended it is a "framework" or "paradigm" for research (van Elk and Aleman 2017;Michel 2022;Sprevak, 2021). Similarly, whereas some have claimed EC is a "thesis" or "hypothesis" (Meteyard et al, 2012;Wilson & Golonka, 2013;Mahon 2015), others have suggested it is a "research programme" or "research tradition" (Shapiro, 2007;Shapiro and Shannon 2021;Milkowski and Nowakowski 2021).…”

“…The issue of theoretical status is important, because, as several authors have noted, different theoretical units carry with them different standards of comparison and modes of relation (Michel 2022;Milkowski and Nowakowski 2021). For example, while behaviourism and cognitivism are incompatible at the level of theory, each offering rival attempts to explain specific phenomenon such as language acquisition, when viewed at the level of research programme, it is less apparent the views stand in direct tension (Neisser, 1967).…”

“…A similar point holds in the case of PP. Michel (2022), for example, suggests that the central tenet of PP is that the "mind entertains a probabilistic, hierarchical generative model that aims at anticipating the inflow of sensory information" (p. 6). Sprevak (2021), in contrast, rejects such as characterisation.…”

“…19 I am also not alone in this position. Michel (2022), for instance, suggests that PP is a "cognitive computational paradigm that is only just emerging and still under construction" (original emphasis) (p.5); while Miłkowski and Nowakowski (2021) suggest that, "EC should be understood as composed of multiple, and sometimes quite extensive, component research subtraditions" (p. S71). However, while landing on the same core idea these accounts differ from the current one with respect to their target of analysis.…”

“…However, while landing on the same core idea these accounts differ from the current one with respect to their target of analysis. Michel (2022), for instance, is concerned with articulating the theoretical status of PP in order to better understand the language of thought hypothesis, while Miłkowski and Nowakowski (2021) are concerned with the status of EC 18 A similar point holds of EC. See Miłkowski and Nowakowski (2021) for discussion.…”