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

It is a curious and important fact about natural languages that they can be and often are used nonliterally. Whereas in artificial lan-guages it is normally impossible to distinguish between the meaning of an expression on the one hand, and the intended meaning the user wishes to convey with that expression on the other (the two are identical), in natural languages a par-allel distinction between sentence meaning and speaker meaning (see, for example, Searle, 1975, in press) underlies all nonliteral uses. One of the central concepts in the analysis of non-literal uses of language is that of indirectness. It is a notion that has begun to attract the attention of linguists, philosophers, psycholo-gists, and computer scientists in their various efforts to come to a better understanding of natural languages and of human linguistic per-formance. One of my purposes in this paper is to show how central a concept indirectness is with respect to the production and comprehension of definite descriptions.

Some psycholinguistic constraints on the construction and interpretation of definite descriptions