English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

This paper replies to Marta Dynel’s review article “Intention to deceive, bald-faced lies, and deceptive implicature: Insights into  Lying at the semantics-pragmatics interface ” ( Intercultural Pragmatics  12(3), 309–332), which discusses my book with the aforementioned title (Meibauer 2014a.  Lying at the semantics-pragmatics interface . Berlin &amp; Boston: De Gruyter Mouton). In particular, my reply addresses the optimal framework for a linguistic analysis of lying, as well as the roles that definitions of lying play in such a framework. I discuss certain aspects, such as the intention to deceive, bald-faced lies, and deceptive implicatures, with respect to Dynel’s criticisms and proposals and illuminate prospects for further research.

Topics in the linguistics of lying: A reply to Marta Dynel