A common argument in deflationary theories of truth is that no content is added to a statement by adding 'is true' to the end. We can say "That turkeys do a jive on Saturdays is true" and mean only that "Turkeys do a jive on Saturday."
On the pure analysis of the meaningfulness of a sentence, the deflationary theorist is right. But aren't most correspondence/coherence theorists claiming that truth ascriptions don't describe or add content to sentences but rather describe a relation that the statement participates (or fails to participate) in?
When the correspondence/coherence theorist of truth describe a sentence as 'true' is the deflationary theorist begging the question by trying to analyze what 'meaning' this ascription adds to the sentence instead of analyzing what relation this ascription adds?