Fascinating. I wonder how to conceptualise it. Could one dare to say that working through EMCA corpus has made AI somewhat interactionally sensitive?! Or, as an alternative, has it just (happened to) make connections between concepts such as "projectability", "joint acitvity", "co-ordination" etc.

Perhaps an argumentative example on how such “further” extrinsic evidences can fail is his (2009) critique of Enfield’s claim that in Lao, simple person reference does “social hierarchisation” even when participants do not respond to these references in any special way.

Very valuable info! But regarding "blame-ability": could one say, for example, that you should not blame only tobacco industry, but also our body's defective weakness for lung etc. cancer? When it comes to ethics, it seems that "blame" should be related to aspects that we can control? Or not?

Some nice direct and conceptual overlaps in the list mediated by Moerman!

You should ask yself: what actually is growing in this economical structure? Economic growth sure doesn't determine growth of culture, cognitive capacity, happiness, well-being etc. The shiny "growth" label makes you to falsely assume that growth in economics provides these other growths.

Thanks! 👍

Count me in :)