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 deals with two cognate modifiers,  respective  and  respectively . Despite the obvious fact that they belong to di Verent parts of speech, they have been considered to perform the same semantic function of mapping two sets of participants in a sentence, and of distributing the predicate of the sentence, in accordance with the mapping, to a number of propositions representing the subparts of the event described in that sentence. As regards their syntactic occurrences, they have been regarded as complementary in distribution. This paper endeavors to show that the two modifiers play different roles and select different domains for their notional operations, and that the syntactic complementarity claimed by many researchers is only apparent and does not obtain in every case. The important thing to note in handling the semantic function and syntactic distribution of these modifiers is their difference in syntactic category. We begin with this very basic observation, and in the course of this study, the slight morphological difference proves to be strongly connected with every aspect of the syntactic and semantic properties of the two modifiers.

On the function and distribution of the modifiers respective and respectively