An introductory phrase need not be a ‘hedge phrase’ in the sense of demoting the following statement—it can just serve to position it properly.
I find a good medium to be ‘I find’, or ‘It strikes me’, or ‘It occurs to me’, depending on context. These are clearly indications of subjectivity without denigrating subjectivity.
“I find Chrome to be the most visually appealing…” is not confrontational at all, and in terms of added length it’s 3 short words (‘I find’, and using ‘to be’ instead of ‘is’), barely a cost at all.
It doesn’t bring up the fact/opinion divide, it just uses it.
It seems we understand ‘hedge phrase’ somewhat differently, but I certainly agree that adding phrases that convert what would otherwise be a statement about the world (e.g. “Chrome is the most etc.”) into a statement about my own thoughts, feelings or experiences (e.g., “I think Chrome is...” or “I find Chrome to be...” or “In my experience Chrome is...” or whatever) makes the statement seem less confrontational, and that the difference in statement length is negligible.
In my more pedantic youth, I entertained myself endlessly by playing this game when people tried to ask me for the time.
“Do you have the time?” “Yes.” ”Will you tell me the time?” “It depends.” ”On what?” “Whether you ask me.” (sigh) “All right, then, will you tell me the time?!?” ”As I say: it depends!”
It astonished me how difficult it was for people to forego polite indirection.
I don’t think they were failing to forego polite indirection so much as failing to discover via mindreading the secret phrasing which they needed to use in order to extract the time from you.
An introductory phrase need not be a ‘hedge phrase’ in the sense of demoting the following statement—it can just serve to position it properly.
I find a good medium to be ‘I find’, or ‘It strikes me’, or ‘It occurs to me’, depending on context. These are clearly indications of subjectivity without denigrating subjectivity.
“I find Chrome to be the most visually appealing…” is not confrontational at all, and in terms of added length it’s 3 short words (‘I find’, and using ‘to be’ instead of ‘is’), barely a cost at all.
It doesn’t bring up the fact/opinion divide, it just uses it.
It seems we understand ‘hedge phrase’ somewhat differently, but I certainly agree that adding phrases that convert what would otherwise be a statement about the world (e.g. “Chrome is the most etc.”) into a statement about my own thoughts, feelings or experiences (e.g., “I think Chrome is...” or “I find Chrome to be...” or “In my experience Chrome is...” or whatever) makes the statement seem less confrontational, and that the difference in statement length is negligible.
“It would be great if you could pass the salt.”
“There is no objective criteria by which it could be ‘great’ if - ”
“I would appreciate it if you would pass the salt.”
“If you think so, then it’s probably true, although there are limits to introspection - ”
“Trust me.”
″ - but even granting that, that’s really a lame counterfactual scenario to raise - ”
“Salt motherfucker. Can you pass it?!”
“I can.”
(A short interval of time elapses. Salt is not passed.)
“Pass the salt!”
In my more pedantic youth, I entertained myself endlessly by playing this game when people tried to ask me for the time.
“Do you have the time?”
“Yes.”
”Will you tell me the time?”
“It depends.”
”On what?”
“Whether you ask me.”
(sigh) “All right, then, will you tell me the time?!?”
”As I say: it depends!”
It astonished me how difficult it was for people to forego polite indirection.
“What time is it?!”
“It’s five o’clock somewhere.”
I don’t think they were failing to forego polite indirection so much as failing to discover via mindreading the secret phrasing which they needed to use in order to extract the time from you.