So according to Jakobson’s six functions of language there’s something called the phatic function, which basically applies to expressions that have no inherent semantic meaning but rather have socio-pragmatic significance. Let’s say we hijack this concept and apply it to Max saying he would have already won the championship in the Mclaren (a gimmick he also pulled last year btw). Firstly this is an inherently meaningless argument because it simply cannot be proven. Even in the improbable case of Max and Lando switching seats in the future it still can’t be proven because all the circumstances would be different. And Max is fully aware of this, so he relies on his credibility as a four-time WDC to sell it as a hypothetical (and a juicy headline), fully aware that he’s safeguarded from being proven wrong because, again, it’s an argument that cannot be proven. It doesn’t matter whether it’s true or not, or whether Max himself even believes it or not, because the whole pragmatic function of this statement is to destabilize the competition by implying they’re mid and bottling the championship. (This also applies to all of Max’s other comments implying the Monza swap was unfair, Mclaren are favoring Lando over Oscar etc. etc.)
HOWEVER. Lando has known him so well for so long that he understands it’s less a personal attack on him than another one of Max’s title fight mindgames. Him saying it’s all “nonsense” and that “it’s [Max’s] kind of aggressive nature” (something he has mentioned repeatedly) shows he knows that Max is saying these things not because he really believes them but because he wants to get into Lando’s head. Which circles back round to Lando saying when you’re friends with a competitor it lets you trust them more but also know when not to trust them. Which is soooo insanely delicious and compelling to me, more so than their Vegas shenanigans, because it implies a level of understanding that Lando has for Max that very few other people possess…
