Prediction

[X99Lynx at aol.com]

In a message dated 4/14/99 12:57:35 AM, rayhendon at worldnet.att.net wrote:

<<A somewhat contentious issue in the community of linguists, at least for
what I can see from my email, is that of making predictions.>>

Unfortunately, the meanings of the word "prediction" are the problem here.

In the strict sense of the scientific method, predictability refers to the
need to test a hypothesis.  What you predict depends on your hypothesis.

So if you hypothesize that Cicero wrote in Latin, then you might predict that
there is a text somewhere by Cicero in Latin or better yet a Latin text where
Cicero wrote in his own hand, "I'm writing in Latin."  By predicting such
evidence, you are showing how you would test your hypothesis.  You or someone
else will know what evidence to look for, based on this prediction.  This is
basic scientific methodology.

If your hypothesis is that French will lose all sounds but "en" in the next
twenty years, you may predict in support of that hypothesis that there is
evidence of it now.  If you predict there is only en or on coming out of
French speakers now, you are providing someone a way to test your hypothsis.
If they find that it is true, the confirmation of your prediction supports
your hypothesis.

"Predictability" is not pronostication.  It is the way we test hypothesis.
Whether a scientific prediction is about the future, or just about what one
will find if one looks or experiments, all depends on the hypothesis.

Hope this clears this up some.

Regards,
Steve Long