Crowther (1993: 3) provides a criticism of accounts that attempt to detail the interaction between agent and environment. He maintains that any description of the ontological reciprocity of agent and context inevitably will be fragmentary and distorted, because pre-reflective reciprocity cannot be captured in words. However that may be, TSC sidesteps the problem by using DST to shed light on the reciprocity of agent and context. Because DST employs a mathematical notation, not a linguistic one, it avoids making explicit ontological commitments to distinctive subcomponents of the inter- action. DST cannot be accused of failing to preserve or express the meaning.
