You need some time to interpret speakers, even if it's just a short break, and learning what and where to edit is part of the whole experience.
Precedent operates when hearers call on their knowledge of the forms speakers commonly use to interpret speakers in new contexts, and when speakers rely on that knowledge when they use the forms and expect to be understood.
In Davidson's work this principle, which admits of various formulations and cannot be rendered in any completely precise form, often appears in terms of the injunction to optimise agreement between ourselves and those we interpret, that is, it counsels us to interpret speakers as holding true beliefs (true by our lights at least) wherever it is plausible to do (see 'Radical Interpretation' [1973]).
Such cues did prove helpful to addressees, who correctly interpreted speakers' instructions virtually all the time.
One possible rationale that might be offered here is that since social practices essentially involve communication, and understanding any form of communication necessarily involves interpreting speakers' claims, understanding the social practice of law necessarily involves interpreting it.
Whereas a Field-inspired representational approach is based on a causal account of reference, Davidson (e.g., 1973) proposes a process of radical interpretation in which an interpreter builds a Tarskian theory to interpret a speaker as holding beliefs which are consistent, coherent, and largely true.
People who make opacity statements, the standard dismissive criticism has it, must nonetheless in their own practices of listening be making some kinds of assumptions about what speaker's intend to say, otherwise they could not interpret the speaker's speech as meaningful.
We can also interpret the speaker's tone as existential frustration, i.e., nobody knows anything now—or ever including the speaker, and this simple, unfortunate fact is fact.
We can also interpret the speaker's tone as existential frustration, i.e., nobody knows anything now — or ever — including the speaker, and this simple, unfortunate fact is fact.
He thinks of meaning theories as statements of what it 'would suffice' to know in order to be in a position to interpret a speaker's utterance.
Abstract: Natural Language Processing, a sub-field of AI, tries to understand and model properties of human (natural) language and the ways it is learned, produced and interpreted by speakers.
