This chapter introduces what I call the ‘predictive turn,’ in which cognitive processes traditionally described in terms of remembering the past are reoriented to face the future. Here, the first-order topic is the phenomenology of reading literary texts, including the emotions of surprise and interest, the senses of agency and presence, and the feelings of immersion and flow, whereas the second-order method triangulates among insights gained from theoretical cognitive neuroscience, cognitive philosophy, and cognitive literary studies. The first part explains how aspects of perception can be understood in terms of prediction, prediction errors, and the management of precision, or the evolving confidence that we place in our predictions, including those related to unfolding stories and their narration. The second part unpacks the relationship between memory and prediction, including revisiting the cognitivist concept of the schema and how it can be applied to literary intertextuality. The third part clarifies how predictive processing is related to movement, grounded language, and active inference, in which perceptual and motor systems work together to reduce prediction error. For literary texts, this might entail attending to the use of grounded or ‘embodied’ language (Kukkonen 2020), among other possibilities such as feelings of estrangement and narrative foregrounding.

The idea of a narrator that is distinct from the author is a basic tenet of narratology. In ancient criticism, however, this idea absent. What is more, ancient critics tended to ascribe utterances of characters in general to authors. This, I argue, is not a deficiency but the expression of a distinctly ancient view of voice, which I reconstruct on the basis of a wide array of texts. Where we see several narrative levels nested into each other, ancient authors and readers envisaged narration as an act of impersonation. One upshot of my analysis is that, while it may be intriguing to explore metalepseis in ancient literature, the very idea of metalepsis conflicts with the premises of narrative as it was understood in antiquity. The ancient view of narration can be linked at least partly to the prominence of performance and therefore reveals the impact of socio-cultural factors; at the same time, it resonates with recent cognitive theory, notably embodied and enactive models of cognition.