 ‘Near-side’ pragmatics (for Korta and Perry’s distinction between ‘near-side’ and ‘far-side’ pragmatics, see  pragmatics)  is a matter of what is said by an utterance; in informal conversation it involves the use of indexicals and pronominal figures that are avoided in legislation, and involves the implications of context for an understanding of the uses of terms. And ‘far-side’ pragmatics (determining what is implicated rather than said, and determining what speech acts are carried out by means of an utterance) can involve figurative uses of language such as sarcasm, innuendos, and other techniques that lawmakers avoid. There is some force in Marmor’s claim that pragmatics is different in law. Legislation systematically avoids many communicative devices that can be so very useful in other contexts of communication. But those devices are also avoided in a wide range of other formalized and technical uses of language—for example, in most wedding invitations, in Wikipedia articles that have not been hacked, and in well-written instruction guides for applying for bank account or for operating a rice cooker.