Oh. Sorry. I seem to have taken the conversation off in a different direction than I had intended. (Foreshadow: The previous sentence is carefully shaped!) When

Oh. Sorry. I seem to have taken the conversation off in a different direction than I had intended. (Foreshadow: The previous sentence is carefully shaped!) When I said "color" I didn't mean to be indicating qualia, although there is that too. What I meant to be indicating is just that each discourse contribution folds into a semantically sensible whole that one can speak (only metaphorically here) as the color of the conversation. One might say (to oneself, if one had a mind to, or was asked): "Oh, but hold on, I didn't realize that this was an interview. I thought that [our mutual friend] just thought that we would get along well. But now that I see it's really an interview, and you're the CEO, well, that makes this a very different situation, and I'll have to put on my 'interview with the boss' face..." and thus like. Again, I don't mean that you would say this explicitly, nor could you, probably, unless you were pressed to do so, in which case you couldn't really completely explain all the nuances, most likely. Nb. (per foreshadow above), each contribution in this, or any discourse, "colors" (or perhaps rather, kneeds together, if you prefer a cooking metaphor) an ongoing collage of situational understanding which comes together to direct, for better or worse, the ongoing complexities of the discourse. But, and here I want to be perfectly clear: Not in a fully forward-going way, because then you'll simply say: well the blah blah state of the whole blah blah network incorporates all that, like Dall-E, etc. melding together everything and smearing it into something sensible. But that's not how people work! In constructing their next action (e.g., sentence) they foreground some aspects of the composed whole, and background others in a goal-directed manner...at least if they're not too drunk.