![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
I wish we had simple words to clarify the purpose of an utterance.
* "in response to what you said ..."
* "go to off an a tangent ..."
* "unrelatedly ...": there are no established claims yet, so no argumentation is likely to ensue.
* "this can't be right because ...": as a consequence, the interlocutor should try to defend their last claim, unless they no longer believe it due to this update.
* "in spite of what you said ...": as a consequence, the interlocutor should try to defend their (implicit) claim, unless they no longer believe it due to this update.
* "to complement what you said ..."
etc.
Of course we already have the above expressions, but they are too bulky and awkward, and as a result people don't use them enough. This causes misunderstandings.
I also wish people wrote focus markers (like italics) more often.
Situation/Interpretation #1: B does not realize that ML and OCaml are the same language.
Situation/Interpretation #2: B does realize that ML and OCaml are the same language, but is an autodidact (emphasis on "myself").
B's second sentence favors interpretation #1, since it's giving a reason for learning OCaml, which would be a superfluous utterance if B knew that this is exactly what A is suggesting (i.e. if the intended interpretation were #2, the second sentence would be a violation of the Maxim of Quantity and the Maxim of Relevance).
The "actually" is another piece of evidence in favor of interpretation #1, because "actually" signals disagreement. B clearly believes that "B should learn OCaml".
A's expressed belief is that "B should learn ML".
According to B's beliefs in situation #1, there is a disagreement between these two, so using "actually" makes sense.
According to B's beliefs in situation #2, there is no disagreement between these two, so "actually" would be out of place.
* "in response to what you said ..."
* "go to off an a tangent ..."
* "unrelatedly ...": there are no established claims yet, so no argumentation is likely to ensue.
* "this can't be right because ...": as a consequence, the interlocutor should try to defend their last claim, unless they no longer believe it due to this update.
* "in spite of what you said ...": as a consequence, the interlocutor should try to defend their (implicit) claim, unless they no longer believe it due to this update.
* "to complement what you said ..."
etc.
Of course we already have the above expressions, but they are too bulky and awkward, and as a result people don't use them enough. This causes misunderstandings.
I also wish people wrote focus markers (like italics) more often.
A - I don't know if you realize this, but CMU has many many people who use ML. You could probably find an undergrad to help you.
B - Actually, I really am thinking of just teaching myself OCaml --- John Doe was pretty persuasive about its virtues.
Situation/Interpretation #1: B does not realize that ML and OCaml are the same language.
Situation/Interpretation #2: B does realize that ML and OCaml are the same language, but is an autodidact (emphasis on "myself").
B's second sentence favors interpretation #1, since it's giving a reason for learning OCaml, which would be a superfluous utterance if B knew that this is exactly what A is suggesting (i.e. if the intended interpretation were #2, the second sentence would be a violation of the Maxim of Quantity and the Maxim of Relevance).
The "actually" is another piece of evidence in favor of interpretation #1, because "actually" signals disagreement. B clearly believes that "B should learn OCaml".
A's expressed belief is that "B should learn ML".
According to B's beliefs in situation #1, there is a disagreement between these two, so using "actually" makes sense.
According to B's beliefs in situation #2, there is no disagreement between these two, so "actually" would be out of place.
