The words "here" and "there" can be modified by other prepositions: "under here", "over there", "out there", "in here" and so on. These combinations operate as a unit.
When "out here" is used by a speaker usually refers to something close to the speaker, but external or remote to some other location being considered, like the location of the person being spoken to, or some context being previously discussed".
If someone is inside a building, you can use "come out here" to ask that person to emerge. The "here" refers to where the speaker is, and that is "out" relative to the person being spoken to.
"Your shoes are out here" is the simple "out here", like in "come out here". Your shoes are here where I am, and relative to you, that is outside.
Someone narrating a story from the field might use a sentence like "out here in the wilderness, you must be self-reliant." Here, the speaker is communicating that he or she is in some location that is remote to some imagined point of departure to which either the speaker, or the people being addressed, have a relationship. This is important because the difference between that reference point and the "here" place is being stressed. A sentence like "it's cold out here" implies a contrast: "It's cold out here, compared to the understood reference place I have in mind".
The other locations like "up here" can be understood similarly. If you venture out to the roof of a high rise building you might say, "What a great view you can enjoy up here", which is a little bit different from just saying, "What a great view you can enjoy here". It also subtly implies that there is a lower place that the speaker has in mind, which in specifically does not have a great view compared to "up here".
In summary, "here" is a specific place, close to the speaker, and if another word is added like "up" or "out", then it brings in a second location. That location might be used to create a comparison or contrast, or simply to relate to another person's location.
Rule of thumb: You can always omit that after the reason (i.e. the reason (that)). Put it another way, wherever you can say the reason that, you can omit that.
That vs. Why: You can use that (which is optional) in place of why but only in defining clauses, and make sure that you use reason not reasons (plural) if you want to use a that-clause. (See Cambridge Dictionary Online's note below.)
Question: [W]hat are the similarities or differences between the two sentences below?
- He didn't tell me the reason that he wore a polka-dot dress.
- He didn't tell me the reason he wore a polka-dot dress.
Answer: There is no difference in meaning whatsoever.
References†:
Macmillan lists these uses of reason, among others:
1 [countable] a fact, situation, or intention that explains why something happened, why someone did something, or why something is true
reason for: The police asked her the reason for her visit.
reason for doing something: Could you explain your reasons for choosing this particular course?
reason why: The reason why so many people caught the disease is still not clear.
reason (that): The reason these cars are so expensive is that they are largely built by hand.
[...]
Cambridge Dictionary Online lists reason why, reason that, and reason + to-infinitive.
Reason why We use reason why before a clause. We often omit why, especially in statements:
The reason (why) I didn’t contact you was that I was only in town for a few hours.
Reason that We use reason that before a clause. We often omit that, especially in statements. Reason that is less common and slightly more formal than reason why:
The reason (that) we need new guidelines is that the present ones are just not working.
We do not use reason in the plural with a that-clause:
There are several reasons why I don’t like the book.
Not: There are several reasons that...
Reason + to-infinitive We can use reason with a to-infinitive:
There’s no reason to be suspicious – everything, is perfectly normal.
Longman English Grammar (by L. G. Alexander) mentions reason why, reason for which, and reason that shortly.
1.38.3 Reason
defining:
That's the reason (for which) he dislikes me.
That's (the reason) why he dislikes me.
non-defining:
My success in business, (the reason) for which he dislikes me, has been due to hard work.
My success in business, the reason why he dislikes me, has been due to hard work. (The reason cannot be omitted before why.)
1.38.4 ('That') in place of 'when', 'where', 'why'
That is possible (but optional) in place of when, where and why but only in defining clauses:
[...]
That wasn't the reason (that) he lied to you ((That) can be replaced by why or for which)
†Even though you've asked specifically for the exclusion of reason why, I decide to keep all alternatives--reason why, reason that, reason for, reason for doing something, reason to do something--in the above quoted texts, because it could, I believe, make this question more useful for the future reader.
Best Answer
Let me add indices to indicate referents, and repoint to clarify what is said to be meant:
That is, there are two intepretations of the sentence You must be very tactful.
While under (or “according to”) the deontic interpretation, the sentence means:
under the epistemic interpretation the sentence means
In other words, the deontic interpretation understands this to be a sentence about the hearer's obligation; the epistemic interpretation understands this to be a sentence about the speaker's inference.
Your rewrite is quite different. Here it is the interpretation which is said to have a meaning. That's an unusual notion, but not meaningless; it would be valid, for instance, if H&P wanted to say that employing this interpretation is a sign of the interpreter's predilection: