Image Jesus before Pilate
“What is truth?” – seriously, not a rhetorical question.

Wanted: help with contemporary epistemology!

I think that the popular “correspondence” theory of truth has been more or less abandoned in thoughtful circles these days, replaced by things like “coherence” theories, assessed by criteria like “comprehensiveness.” I think I understand that, although I’m no expert. I think I partially understand the notion of “warranted true belief.”

My immediate question is this: would a theory of truth that locates truth in the relationship among an account of reality (total or partial – presumably always partial), its interpretation by an audience, and the reality of which it is an account, and that assesses the [local] goodness of that relationship by its success (adequacy? practical adequacy?) in orienting the audience to the reality of which the account is an account, as measured by particular outcomes or kinds of outcomes, go a long way towards resolving the long-standing problem of affirming the truth-value of myth?

It seems to me it could, or at least might. [Would this be a re-specification of a pragmatist criterion for truth? How would it connect with “warrant” theories?]