And unfortunately your question may be very near that boundary. Looking at this verbally, I would say that "it is useful to say this," and "it is true to say this," are very close, although not identical. We could put it this way: a statement is true if it is useful because it points at reality. This is to exclude, of course, the usefulness of lying and self deceiving. These things may be useful, but they get their utility from pointing away from reality. If a statement is useful because it points at reality, I would say that to that extent it is true (to that extent, because it might also have some falsehood insofar as it might have some disutility in addition to its utility.)

This, I think, gets at why I don't want to acknowledge "true" and "false", because it seems to me the only way to salvage those terms is to make them teleological to the purpose of likelihood of matching experiences of reality. I guess this is fine but it's not really what most people mean when they say "true" and "false" as far as I can tell, so it seems better to reject the notions of "true" and "false" to avoid confusion about what we're discussing.