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

Il est communément admis que la syntaxe d'une phrase et sa sémantique fonctionnent de manière harmonieuse, pour que la langue soit cohérente. Nous analysons ici quelques exemples où la syntaxe impose ses propres règles, en dépit des données sémantiques, et où ce sont nos connaissances cognitives générales qui nous permettent de construire convenablement le sens. A l'inverse, la sémantique peut “tordre” certaines règles syntaxiques pour permettre à l'énonciateur une meilleure stratégie communicative. It is commonly assumed that the syntax of a sentence and its semantic interpretation cannot differ radically, if some kind of coherence is to be maintained. We analyse here some examples that tend to show that syntax sometimes imposes its own rules, regardless of the semantic data, and that the interpretation is then saved because of our general cognitive knowledge about the world. Conversely semantics sometimes “twists” the grammatical rules so as to enrich the linguistic tools the speaker requires for a better encoding of his/her communicative desires

Linear Order and the Construction of Meaning: Is Syntax Deceptive?