ABSTRACT
If a person could successfully communicate just by knowing the language (or code) others use, and having something to say—if it were not problematic to achieve coherence, understanding, and coordination—then communication would be the neutral vehicle that many think it is: a means to influence what happens between people by informing them about the external circumstances they are in, and what the demands on them and options of response are as a result. But if (as the contributors to this volume maintain) coherence, understanding, and coordination have to be worked at and are joint achievements of the people involved, then taking part in the communication process—by placing demands on people and structuring options of response—influences what happens between them, apart from the demands of the external situation. From the former perspective, communication is consequential in what I call the weak sense (per the concluding discussion of my chapter); from the latter perspective, communication is consequential in the strong sense.
