20 Myths About Free Pragmatic: Busted: Difference between revisions

From Fanomos Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
mNo edit summary
mNo edit summary
 
(2 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
What is Pragmatics?<br><br>Pragmatics is the study of the connection between context, language and meaning. It poses questions such as: What do people really mean when they use words?<br><br>It's a philosophies of practical and reasonable actions. It differs from idealism, which is the belief that one should stick to their beliefs regardless of the circumstances.<br><br>What is Pragmatics?<br><br>Pragmatics is the study of ways that language users get meaning from and with each one another. It is often viewed as a component of language, but it differs from semantics because pragmatics concentrates on what the user is trying to convey and not what the meaning is.<br><br>As a research field, pragmatics is relatively young and its research has expanded rapidly in the last few decades. It has been mostly an academic discipline within linguistics but it also influences research in other fields like psychology, speech-language pathology, sociolinguistics, 라이브 카지노 - [https://pragmatic-kr89000.theideasblog.com/30892318/10-meetups-about-free-slot-pragmatic-you-should-attend Https://pragmatic-kr89000.theideasblog.Com/30892318/10-meetups-about-free-slot-pragmatic-you-should-attend] - and anthropology.<br><br>There are many different perspectives on pragmatics, which have contributed to its development and growth. One perspective is the Gricean pragmatics approach, which focuses on the notion of intention and [https://growthbookmarks.com/ 라이브 카지노] its interaction with the speaker's knowledge of the listener's understanding. The lexical and concept approaches to pragmatics are also perspectives on the topic. These perspectives have contributed to the diversity of subjects that researchers in pragmatics have researched.<br><br>The research in pragmatics has been focused on a variety of subjects, including L2 pragmatic comprehension, production of requests by EFL learners and the role of theory of mind in mental and physical metaphors. It is also applied to social and cultural phenomena, like political discourse, discriminatory language and interpersonal communication. Researchers studying pragmatics have employed diverse methodologies from experimental to sociocultural.<br><br>Figure 9A-C illustrates that the size of the knowledge base for pragmatics differs depending on the database utilized. The US and UK are two of the top producers in research on pragmatics. However, their rank differs based on the database. This difference is due to the fact that pragmatics is an interconnected field that is inextricably linked with other disciplines.<br><br>This makes it difficult to classify the top pragmatics authors by their publications only. However it is possible to identify the most influential authors by examining their contributions to the field of pragmatics. For instance Bambini's contribution to the field of pragmatics includes pioneering concepts such as conversational implicature and politeness theory. Grice, Saul, and Kasper are the most influential authors of pragmatics.<br><br>What is Free Pragmatics?<br><br>The study of pragmatics is more concerned with the contexts and language users than it is with truth grammar, reference, or. It focuses on the ways in which an utterance can be understood to mean various things depending on the context and also those caused by indexicality or ambiguity. It also focuses on the strategies employed by listeners to determine if utterances have a communicative intent. It is closely linked to the theory of conversative implicature, which was first developed by Paul Grice.<br><br>While the distinction between semantics and pragmatics is a well-known and long-established one, there is a lot of controversy about the precise boundaries of these fields. For example, some philosophers have argued that the notion of a sentence's meaning is a part of semantics while others have argued that this type of thing should be considered as a pragmatic issue.<br><br>Another controversy concerns whether pragmatics is a branch of philosophy of languages or a branch of the study of linguistics. Some researchers have suggested that pragmatics is an independent field and should be considered a part of linguistics along with phonology. syntax, semantics, etc. Others have suggested the study of pragmatics is a part of philosophy because it examines how our ideas about the meaning and  프라그마틱 공식홈페이지 ([https://pr1bookmarks.com/story18300303/the-10-worst-pragmatic-product-authentication-failures-of-all-time-could-have-been-prevented Pr1Bookmarks.Com]) use of languages influence our theories about how languages function.<br><br>The debate has been fuelled by a handful of issues that are fundamental to the study of pragmatism. For instance, some researchers have suggested that pragmatics isn't a discipline in and of itself because it examines the ways people interpret and use language without necessarily being able to provide any information regarding what is actually being said. This type of method is known as far-side pragmatics. Some scholars have argued that the study is a discipline in its own right, since it examines the manner in which the meaning and usage of language is affected by cultural and social factors. This is referred to as near-side pragmatics.<br><br>Other topics of discussion in pragmatics include the manner we think about the nature of the utterance interpretation process as an inferential process and the role that primary pragmatic processes play in the determination of what is being said by an individual speaker in a sentence. These are the issues addressed in greater detail in the papers of Recanati and Bach. Both papers address the notions of saturation and free pragmatic enrichment. Both are significant pragmatic processes in the sense that they shape the meaning of an utterance.<br><br>How is Free Pragmatics Different from Explanatory Pragmatics?<br><br>Pragmatics is the study of the role that context plays to the meaning of language. It studies the way that humans use language in social interaction and the relationship between speaker and interpreter. Pragmaticians are linguists who specialize in pragmatics.<br><br>Many different theories of pragmatics have been developed over time. Some, like Gricean pragmatics, focus on the communication intention of a speaker. Others, like Relevance Theory concentrate on the processes of understanding that occur during the interpretation of utterances by listeners. Certain pragmatic approaches have been combined with other disciplines like cognitive science or philosophy.<br><br>There are also differing opinions regarding the boundaries between pragmatics and semantics. Certain philosophers, such as Morris, believe that pragmatics and semantics are two distinct subjects. He asserts semantics is concerned with the relationship of signs to objects they could or might not denote whereas pragmatics is concerned with the use of words in context.<br><br>Other philosophers such as Bach and Harnish have argued that pragmatism is a subfield of semantics. They define "near-side" and "far-side" pragmatics. Near-side pragmatics focuses on the words spoken, while far-side pragmatics is focused on the logical consequences of saying something. They argue that semantics determines the logical implications of an expression, whereas other pragmatics are determined by the pragmatic processes.<br><br>One of the most important aspects of pragmatics is that it is a context-dependent phenomenon. This means that a single utterance can have different meanings based on factors like indexicality or ambiguity. Other things that can change the meaning of an expression include discourse structure, speaker intentions and beliefs, as well as expectations of the listener.<br><br>Another aspect of pragmatics is that it is a matter of culture. This is due to different cultures having their own rules about what is acceptable to say in various situations. For example, it is acceptable in certain cultures to keep eye contact while it is rude in other cultures.<br><br>There are many different perspectives of pragmatics, and a lot of research is being conducted in the field. Some of the main areas of research include formal and computational pragmatics theoretic and experimental pragmatics; cross-linguistic and intercultural pragmatics; as well as pragmatics in the clinical and experimental sense.<br><br>How does Free Pragmatics compare to Explanatory Pragmatics?<br><br>The discipline of pragmatics is concerned with the way meaning is communicated through language in context. It is less concerned with the grammatical structure of the spoken word and more on what the speaker is actually saying. Pragmaticians are linguists who specialize on pragmatics. The topic of pragmatics is linked to other areas of the study of linguistics, such as syntax and semantics or philosophy of language.<br><br>In recent years, the area of pragmatics has been developing in a variety of directions, including computational linguistics, conversational pragmatics, and theoretical pragmatics. These areas are distinguished by a variety of research that addresses issues like lexical characteristics and the interplay between discourse, language and meaning.<br><br>In the philosophical debate about pragmatism one of the main questions is whether it is possible to provide a thorough and systematic explanation of the relationship between pragmatics and semantics. Some philosophers have claimed that it is not (e.g. Morris 1938, Kaplan 1989). Other philosophers have argued the distinction between semantics and pragmatics is not well-defined and that they're the same thing.<br><br>It is not uncommon for scholars to go back and forth between these two views and argue that certain phenomena are either semantics or  [https://carolee204kqc2.wikiap.com/user 프라그마틱 슬롯 체험] pragmatics. Some scholars say that if a statement is interpreted with a literal truth conditional meaning, it is semantics. Others contend that the possibility that a statement may be interpreted differently is pragmatics.<br><br>Other pragmatics researchers have adopted an alternative route. They argue that the truth-conditional interpretation for a statement is only one of many possible interpretations and that they are all valid. This method is often called "far-side pragmatics".<br><br>Recent research in pragmatics has attempted to combine semantic and far side approaches. It attempts to represent the entire range of interpretive possibilities that a speaker's speech can offer by illustrating how the speaker's beliefs and intentions contribute to the interpretation. For example, Champollion et al. (2019) combine an Gricean game-theoretic model of the Rational Speech Act framework with technological advances from Franke and Bergen (2020). This model predicts that listeners will consider a range of possible exhaustified parses of an utterance containing the universal FCI any which is what makes the exclusiveness implicature so robust as compared to other plausible implicatures.
What is Pragmatics?<br><br>Pragmatics examines the relationship between context and language. It addresses issues like What do people mean by the terms they use?<br><br>It's a way of thinking that focuses on practical and reasonable actions. It is in contrast to idealism, which is the belief that one should adhere to their beliefs regardless of what.<br><br>What is Pragmatics?<br><br>The study of pragmatics examines the way that language users interact and communicate with one with one another. It is typically thought of as a component of language however it differs from semantics because pragmatics looks at what the user is trying to convey,  [https://socialmarkz.com/story8639303/the-reasons-pragmatic-ranking-has-become-everyone-s-obsession-in-2024 프라그마틱 슬롯 조작] not what the meaning actually is.<br><br>As a field of study it is comparatively new, and its research has grown rapidly over the past few decades. It has been mostly an academic discipline within linguistics, however it also has an impact on research in other fields, such as psychology, speech-language pathology, sociolinguistics, and anthropology.<br><br>There are a variety of perspectives on pragmatics that have contributed to its growth and development. For example, one perspective is the Gricean approach to pragmatics which focuses on the notion of intention and how it relates to the speaker's comprehension of the listener's. Other perspectives on pragmatics include the lexical and conceptual approaches to pragmatics. These views have contributed to the wide range of subjects that pragmatics researchers have studied.<br><br>Research in pragmatics has been focused on a variety of subjects such as L2 pragmatic understanding, production of requests by EFL learners, and the role of the theory of mind in mental and physical metaphors. It has also been applied to social and cultural phenomena, such as political discourse, discriminatory language and interpersonal communication. Pragmatics researchers have also employed diverse methodologies, from experimental to sociocultural.<br><br>The amount of knowledge base in pragmatics is different according to the database, as illustrated in Figure 9A-C. The US and UK are two of the top performers in the field of pragmatics research. However, their ranking is dependent on the database. This is due to the fact that pragmatics is an interconnected field that is inextricably linked with other disciplines.<br><br>It is therefore difficult to determine the top pragmatics authors by the quantity of their publications. However, it is possible to identify the most influential authors through analyzing their contributions to pragmatics. For instance Bambini's contribution to the field of pragmatics is a pioneering concept such as conversational implicature and politeness theory. Grice, Saul, and Kasper are also highly influential authors of pragmatics.<br><br>What is Free Pragmatics?<br><br>The study of pragmatics concentrates on the users and contexts of language use instead of focusing on reference, truth, or grammar. It focuses on how one word can be understood in different ways in different contexts. This includes ambiguity as well as indexicality. It also examines the strategies that listeners employ to determine which utterances are intended to be communicated. It is closely linked to the theory of conversational implicature, pioneered by Paul Grice.<br><br>While the distinction between pragmatics and semantics is a well-known and long-established one There is much debate about the precise boundaries of these disciplines. Some philosophers argue that the concept of sentence meaning is a component of semantics, whereas others claim that this type of problem should be considered pragmatic.<br><br>Another debate is whether pragmatics is a part of philosophy of languages or a branch of the study of the study of linguistics. Some researchers have suggested that pragmatics is an independent discipline and should be treated as part of linguistics, along with phonology. Syntax, semantics, etc. Others have argued that the study of pragmatics is a part of philosophy since it deals with the way in which our beliefs about meaning and  [https://bookmarkfame.com/story18164634/the-most-significant-issue-with-pragmatic-official-website-and-how-you-can-repair-it 프라그마틱 무료게임] uses of languages influence our theories on how languages function.<br><br>The debate has been fuelled by a handful of questions that are essential to the study of pragmatism. For instance, some scholars have argued that pragmatics is not a discipline in its own right because it examines the ways people interpret and use language without necessarily referring to any facts about what is actually being said. This type of approach is known as far-side pragmatics. Other scholars, however, have argued that the study should be considered a field in its own right because it examines the way the meaning and usage of language is influenced by social and cultural factors. This is known as near-side pragmatics.<br><br>The pragmatics field also discusses the inferential nature of utterances as well as the significance of the primary pragmatic processes in determining the meaning of what a speaker is expressing in a sentence. These are topics that are more thoroughly discussed in the papers written by Recanati and Bach. Both of these papers discuss the notions of saturation as well as free pragmatic enrichment. These are crucial pragmatic processes in that they help to shape the meaning of an utterance.<br><br>What is the difference between Free Pragmatics and from Explanatory Pragmatics?<br><br>Pragmatics is the study of the role that context plays to linguistic meaning. It examines how language is used in social interaction, and the relationship between the speaker and the interpreter. Pragmaticians are linguists that focus in pragmatics.<br><br>Over the years, many theories of pragmatism were developed. Some, such as Gricean pragmatics focus on the communicative intent of the speaker. Others, such as Relevance Theory concentrate on the processes of understanding that occur during utterance interpretation by listeners. Certain approaches to pragmatics have been combined with other disciplines, such as philosophy and cognitive science.<br><br>There are also divergent opinions on the boundary between pragmatics and semantics. Morris is one philosopher who believes that semantics and pragmatism are two different topics. He says that semantics deals with the relation of words to objects they may or may not denote, whereas pragmatics is concerned with the usage of words in a context.<br><br>Other philosophers like Bach and Harnish have suggested that pragmatism is an subfield within semantics. They differentiate between "near-side" and "far-side" pragmatics. Near-side pragmatics concerns what is said, whereas far-side is focused on the logical implications of saying something. They believe that semantics determines some of the pragmatics of a statement, whereas other pragmatics are determined by the pragmatic processes.<br><br>The context is among the most important aspects in pragmatics. This means that the same word could have different meanings in different contexts, depending on things such as indexicality and ambiguity. The structure of the conversation, the beliefs of the speaker and intentions, as well listener expectations can also change the meaning of a phrase.<br><br>Another aspect of pragmatics is that it is a matter of culture. It is because every culture has its own rules for what is appropriate in different situations. In certain cultures, it's acceptable to look at each other. In other cultures, it's rude.<br><br>There are a variety of views of pragmatics, and a great deal of research is being done in this field. There are a variety of areas of study, including computational and formal pragmatics, theoretical and experimental pragmatics, intercultural and cross linguistic pragmatics and pragmatics in the clinical and experimental sense.<br><br>What is the relationship between free Pragmatics and to Explanatory Pragmatics?<br><br>The discipline of pragmatics, a linguistic field, is concerned with the way meaning is conveyed by language use in context. It is less concerned with the grammatical structure that is used in the speech and more on what the speaker is actually saying. Linguists who specialize in pragmatics are referred to as pragmaticians. The subject of pragmatics is connected to other areas of linguistics like syntax, semantics and philosophy of language.<br><br>In recent years the field of pragmatics has evolved in a variety of directions. These include conversational pragmatics and computational linguistics. There is a wide range of research in these areas, which address issues such as the role of lexical elements and the interaction between language and discourse, and the nature of the concept of meaning.<br><br>One of the main issues in the philosophical discussion of pragmatics is whether or not it is possible to have a rigorous,  [https://bookmarksfocus.com/story3752657/what-is-pragmatic-demo-and-how-to-make-use-of-it 무료슬롯 프라그마틱] 슬롯 사이트 - [https://bookmarkloves.com/story20225209/14-misconceptions-common-to-pragmatic-official-website bookmarkloves.com], systematic account of the pragmatics/semantics interface. Some philosophers have argued that it isn't (e.g. Morris 1938, Kaplan 1989). Other philosophers have argued that the distinction between semantics and [https://freebookmarkpost.com/story18185722/15-weird-hobbies-that-ll-make-you-smarter-at-pragmatic-play 프라그마틱 게임] 추천 ([https://mysocialquiz.com/story3688684/10-facts-about-pragmatic-product-authentication-that-can-instantly-put-you-in-a-good-mood Mysocialquiz.com]) pragmatics isn't well-defined, and that they are the same.<br><br>The debate over these positions is usually an ongoing debate and scholars arguing that particular instances fall under the umbrella of either pragmatics or semantics. For example some scholars believe that if a statement has a literal truth-conditional meaning then it is semantics. On the other hand, others believe that the fact that an expression may be interpreted in various ways is a sign of pragmatics.<br><br>Other pragmatics researchers have taken an alternative approach. They argue that the truth-conditional interpretation for a statement is just one of the many possible interpretations and that all interpretations are valid. This approach is often called "far-side pragmatics".<br><br>Recent work in pragmatics has tried to integrate semantic and far side approaches. It attempts to represent the full range of interpretational possibilities that a speaker's speech can offer by demonstrating how the speaker's beliefs as well as intentions affect the interpretation. For example, Champollion et al. The 2019 version combines a Gricean model of the Rational Speech Act framework, with technological innovations created by Franke and Bergen. This model predicts listeners will have to entertain a myriad of exhausted parses of an utterance that contains the universal FCI Any, and this is the reason why the exclusivity implicature is so robust compared to other plausible implications.

Latest revision as of 03:40, 20 January 2025

What is Pragmatics?

Pragmatics examines the relationship between context and language. It addresses issues like What do people mean by the terms they use?

It's a way of thinking that focuses on practical and reasonable actions. It is in contrast to idealism, which is the belief that one should adhere to their beliefs regardless of what.

What is Pragmatics?

The study of pragmatics examines the way that language users interact and communicate with one with one another. It is typically thought of as a component of language however it differs from semantics because pragmatics looks at what the user is trying to convey, 프라그마틱 슬롯 조작 not what the meaning actually is.

As a field of study it is comparatively new, and its research has grown rapidly over the past few decades. It has been mostly an academic discipline within linguistics, however it also has an impact on research in other fields, such as psychology, speech-language pathology, sociolinguistics, and anthropology.

There are a variety of perspectives on pragmatics that have contributed to its growth and development. For example, one perspective is the Gricean approach to pragmatics which focuses on the notion of intention and how it relates to the speaker's comprehension of the listener's. Other perspectives on pragmatics include the lexical and conceptual approaches to pragmatics. These views have contributed to the wide range of subjects that pragmatics researchers have studied.

Research in pragmatics has been focused on a variety of subjects such as L2 pragmatic understanding, production of requests by EFL learners, and the role of the theory of mind in mental and physical metaphors. It has also been applied to social and cultural phenomena, such as political discourse, discriminatory language and interpersonal communication. Pragmatics researchers have also employed diverse methodologies, from experimental to sociocultural.

The amount of knowledge base in pragmatics is different according to the database, as illustrated in Figure 9A-C. The US and UK are two of the top performers in the field of pragmatics research. However, their ranking is dependent on the database. This is due to the fact that pragmatics is an interconnected field that is inextricably linked with other disciplines.

It is therefore difficult to determine the top pragmatics authors by the quantity of their publications. However, it is possible to identify the most influential authors through analyzing their contributions to pragmatics. For instance Bambini's contribution to the field of pragmatics is a pioneering concept such as conversational implicature and politeness theory. Grice, Saul, and Kasper are also highly influential authors of pragmatics.

What is Free Pragmatics?

The study of pragmatics concentrates on the users and contexts of language use instead of focusing on reference, truth, or grammar. It focuses on how one word can be understood in different ways in different contexts. This includes ambiguity as well as indexicality. It also examines the strategies that listeners employ to determine which utterances are intended to be communicated. It is closely linked to the theory of conversational implicature, pioneered by Paul Grice.

While the distinction between pragmatics and semantics is a well-known and long-established one There is much debate about the precise boundaries of these disciplines. Some philosophers argue that the concept of sentence meaning is a component of semantics, whereas others claim that this type of problem should be considered pragmatic.

Another debate is whether pragmatics is a part of philosophy of languages or a branch of the study of the study of linguistics. Some researchers have suggested that pragmatics is an independent discipline and should be treated as part of linguistics, along with phonology. Syntax, semantics, etc. Others have argued that the study of pragmatics is a part of philosophy since it deals with the way in which our beliefs about meaning and 프라그마틱 무료게임 uses of languages influence our theories on how languages function.

The debate has been fuelled by a handful of questions that are essential to the study of pragmatism. For instance, some scholars have argued that pragmatics is not a discipline in its own right because it examines the ways people interpret and use language without necessarily referring to any facts about what is actually being said. This type of approach is known as far-side pragmatics. Other scholars, however, have argued that the study should be considered a field in its own right because it examines the way the meaning and usage of language is influenced by social and cultural factors. This is known as near-side pragmatics.

The pragmatics field also discusses the inferential nature of utterances as well as the significance of the primary pragmatic processes in determining the meaning of what a speaker is expressing in a sentence. These are topics that are more thoroughly discussed in the papers written by Recanati and Bach. Both of these papers discuss the notions of saturation as well as free pragmatic enrichment. These are crucial pragmatic processes in that they help to shape the meaning of an utterance.

What is the difference between Free Pragmatics and from Explanatory Pragmatics?

Pragmatics is the study of the role that context plays to linguistic meaning. It examines how language is used in social interaction, and the relationship between the speaker and the interpreter. Pragmaticians are linguists that focus in pragmatics.

Over the years, many theories of pragmatism were developed. Some, such as Gricean pragmatics focus on the communicative intent of the speaker. Others, such as Relevance Theory concentrate on the processes of understanding that occur during utterance interpretation by listeners. Certain approaches to pragmatics have been combined with other disciplines, such as philosophy and cognitive science.

There are also divergent opinions on the boundary between pragmatics and semantics. Morris is one philosopher who believes that semantics and pragmatism are two different topics. He says that semantics deals with the relation of words to objects they may or may not denote, whereas pragmatics is concerned with the usage of words in a context.

Other philosophers like Bach and Harnish have suggested that pragmatism is an subfield within semantics. They differentiate between "near-side" and "far-side" pragmatics. Near-side pragmatics concerns what is said, whereas far-side is focused on the logical implications of saying something. They believe that semantics determines some of the pragmatics of a statement, whereas other pragmatics are determined by the pragmatic processes.

The context is among the most important aspects in pragmatics. This means that the same word could have different meanings in different contexts, depending on things such as indexicality and ambiguity. The structure of the conversation, the beliefs of the speaker and intentions, as well listener expectations can also change the meaning of a phrase.

Another aspect of pragmatics is that it is a matter of culture. It is because every culture has its own rules for what is appropriate in different situations. In certain cultures, it's acceptable to look at each other. In other cultures, it's rude.

There are a variety of views of pragmatics, and a great deal of research is being done in this field. There are a variety of areas of study, including computational and formal pragmatics, theoretical and experimental pragmatics, intercultural and cross linguistic pragmatics and pragmatics in the clinical and experimental sense.

What is the relationship between free Pragmatics and to Explanatory Pragmatics?

The discipline of pragmatics, a linguistic field, is concerned with the way meaning is conveyed by language use in context. It is less concerned with the grammatical structure that is used in the speech and more on what the speaker is actually saying. Linguists who specialize in pragmatics are referred to as pragmaticians. The subject of pragmatics is connected to other areas of linguistics like syntax, semantics and philosophy of language.

In recent years the field of pragmatics has evolved in a variety of directions. These include conversational pragmatics and computational linguistics. There is a wide range of research in these areas, which address issues such as the role of lexical elements and the interaction between language and discourse, and the nature of the concept of meaning.

One of the main issues in the philosophical discussion of pragmatics is whether or not it is possible to have a rigorous, 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트 - bookmarkloves.com, systematic account of the pragmatics/semantics interface. Some philosophers have argued that it isn't (e.g. Morris 1938, Kaplan 1989). Other philosophers have argued that the distinction between semantics and 프라그마틱 게임 추천 (Mysocialquiz.com) pragmatics isn't well-defined, and that they are the same.

The debate over these positions is usually an ongoing debate and scholars arguing that particular instances fall under the umbrella of either pragmatics or semantics. For example some scholars believe that if a statement has a literal truth-conditional meaning then it is semantics. On the other hand, others believe that the fact that an expression may be interpreted in various ways is a sign of pragmatics.

Other pragmatics researchers have taken an alternative approach. They argue that the truth-conditional interpretation for a statement is just one of the many possible interpretations and that all interpretations are valid. This approach is often called "far-side pragmatics".

Recent work in pragmatics has tried to integrate semantic and far side approaches. It attempts to represent the full range of interpretational possibilities that a speaker's speech can offer by demonstrating how the speaker's beliefs as well as intentions affect the interpretation. For example, Champollion et al. The 2019 version combines a Gricean model of the Rational Speech Act framework, with technological innovations created by Franke and Bergen. This model predicts listeners will have to entertain a myriad of exhausted parses of an utterance that contains the universal FCI Any, and this is the reason why the exclusivity implicature is so robust compared to other plausible implications.