“Because I Love You …” The Tactical Use of Attributional Expressions in Conversation

While attributional processes are traditionally regarded as intrapersonal phenomena, attributional statements are a common feature of interpersonal communication. This study sought to explore the nature of attributions that are used tactically in conversation. Among other tasks, participants were asked to describe conversations in which causal statements had been posited for some “ulterior” purpose—perhaps to evoke an emotion, obtain a behavior, or receive some sort of compliment. Results revealed that the most commonly cited tactical attributions included excuses, justifications, and affiliation moves. Nontactical attributions, in contrast, rarely included affiliation moves. Attributions that were used tactically also tended to focus more frequently on positive events, behaviors, or qualities and tended to emphasize interpersonal, stable sources more often than nontactical attributions. The most frequently perceived goal for tactical attributions was to obtain an object or behavior. Implications for an extension of the literature on accounts are discussed.     

Vagueness as closeness

This paper presents and defends a definition of vagueness, compares it favourably with alternative definitions, and draws out some consequences of accepting this definition for the project of offering a substantive theory of vagueness. The definition is roughly this: a predicate ‘F’ is vague just in case for any objects a and b, if a and b are very close in respects relevant to the possession of F, then ‘Fa’ and ‘Fb’ are very close in respect of truth. The definition is extended to cover vagueness of many-place predicates, of properties and relations, and of objects. Some of the most important advantages of the definition are that it captures the intuitions which motivate the thought that vague predicates are tolerant, without leading to contradiction, and that it yields a clear understanding of the relationships between higher-order vagueness, sorites susceptibility, blurred boundaries, and borderline cases. The most notable consequence of the definition is that the correct theory of vagueness must countenance degrees of truth.