Thank you very much for your thoughts. You make several much appreciated important points.

You write “this merely continues the problem we have already--disagreement over the meaning of truth.” Bingo. The idea of truth units is any meaning of truth can be converted into truth units, without losing anything significant in translation.

MAGA’s “truths” are mythos versus logos. But their mythos can be expressed in truth units, just like the opposing logos can. Absolutely, such an expression will be staggeringly difficult to follow without a feel for sociolinguistics and rhetorical structures.

Nonetheless the expression will be still somewhat meaningful without knowledge of sociolinguistics, etc, because truth units are a “deconstruction” of sociolinguistics. By this I mean sociolinguistic theory would be recognized in the MAGA truth units expression by those who understand sociolinguistics.

As an analogy, biochemistry analyzes protein structures (rings of carbon atoms, etc). The why's and wherefore's of these structures are incredibly esoteric. On the other hand, you can “map” any protein using an ontology of basic atomic theory (carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, etc).

So you might say truth units are a potential way to “bridge interpretive communities.” While people like me who remember something about atoms and molecules from high school will probably never understand the biochemistry of protein structures, we can start to understand what biochemists (like my brother-in-law) are talking about.

It would take me years to write a complete truth units expression of MAGA myth vs logos. As you say, “that analysis, however, will, I suspect, be beyond my own ability to fully understand it.” But conceptually I think it could be done. And conceptually I think it could be understood by patient, open-minded MAGA people who couldn’t make it through an academic paper. ("One small step" as they say.)