mNo edit summary
mNo edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
What is Pragmatics?<br><br>Pragmatics is a study of the connection between language and context. It addresses issues like: What do people mean by the words they use?<br><br>It's a philosophy that is focused on the practical and sensible actions. It's in opposition to idealism, the belief that you must always abide by your principles.<br><br>What is Pragmatics?<br><br>Pragmatics is the study of ways in which language users get meaning from and with each one another. It is often viewed as a part of the language, although it differs from semantics because pragmatics examines what the user is trying to convey rather than what the meaning actually is.<br><br>As a research field it is comparatively new and its research has been growing rapidly over the past few decades. It is a language academic field, but it has also affected research in other areas such as psychology, sociolinguistics, and the field of anthropology.<br><br>There are a myriad of methods of pragmatics that have contributed to the development and growth of this field. For example, one perspective is the Gricean approach to pragmatics, which focuses on the notion of intention and how it interacts with the speaker's knowledge of the listener's understanding. Conceptual and lexical perspectives on pragmatics are also views on the topic. These perspectives have contributed to the diversity of subjects that researchers in pragmatics have studied.<br><br>The research in pragmatics has covered a broad variety of topics, including L2 pragmatic comprehension and request production by EFL students, as well as the importance of the theory of mind in physical and mental metaphors. It can also be applied to cultural and social phenomena, such as political discourse, discriminatory language and interpersonal communication. Pragmatics researchers have also employed various methods from experimental to sociocultural.<br><br>Figure 9A-C shows that the size of the knowledge base on pragmatics is different depending on which database is used. The US and the UK are among the top researchers in pragmatics research, but their positions differ based on the database. This is because pragmatics is a multidisciplinary area that intersects other disciplines.<br><br>It is therefore difficult to rank the best pragmatics authors solely based on the number of publications they have published. It is possible to identify influential authors by looking at their contributions to the field of pragmatics. Bambini is one example. He has contributed to pragmatics through concepts like conversational implicititure and politeness theories. Other authors who have been influential in the field of pragmatics are Grice, Saul and Kasper.<br><br>What is Free Pragmatics?<br><br>The study of pragmatics is more concerned with the contexts and the users of language than it is with truth grammar, reference, or. It examines how a single utterance may be understood differently in different contexts. This includes ambiguity and indexicality. It also focuses on the strategies used by listeners to determine if phrases have a message. It is closely connected 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, [https://www.google.co.ls/url?q=https://writeablog.net/scarfsofa0/pragmatic-free-trial-tips-from-the-most-effective-in-the-industry 프라그마틱 게임] 정품확인 ([https://firsturl.de/oS2cyCb click through the following website]) long-established one however, there is much debate about the precise boundaries of these fields. For instance philosophers have suggested that the concept of 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 issue is whether pragmatics is a branch of philosophy of language or a branch of the study of linguistics. Some researchers have argued that pragmatics is a subject in its own right and should be considered a distinct part of the field of linguistics along with syntax, phonology, semantics, etc. Others, however, have claimed that the study of pragmatics should be viewed as an aspect of philosophy of language because it focuses on the ways in which our ideas about the meaning and uses of language affect our theories of how languages function.<br><br>This debate has been fueled by a few key questions that are essential to the study of pragmatics. For example, some scholars have claimed that pragmatics isn't a discipline in and of itself because it studies the ways in which people interpret and use language without using any data about what actually gets said. This sort of approach is referred to as far-side pragmatics. Certain scholars have argued that this research should be considered as an independent discipline because it examines how cultural and social influences affect the meaning and use language. This is known as near-side pragmatics.<br><br>Other topics of discussion in pragmatics are the ways we think about the nature of the utterance interpretation process as an inferential process and the importance that primary pragmatic processes play in the determining of what is being said by the speaker in a particular sentence. Recanati and Bach discuss these topics in more depth. Both papers address the notions of the concept of saturation and free pragmatic enrichment. These are significant pragmatic processes that help shape the overall meaning an utterance.<br><br>What is the difference between explanatory and free Pragmatics?<br><br>The study of pragmatics is how the context affects the meaning of linguistics. It examines how language is used in social interaction, and the relationship between the interpreter and the speaker. Pragmaticians are linguists who specialize in pragmatics.<br><br>Over the years, many theories of pragmatism have been developed. Some, such as Gricean pragmatics, concentrate on the communication intention of a speaker. Relevance Theory for instance is focused on the processes of understanding that take place when listeners interpret the meaning of utterances. Some pragmatics theories have been merged with other disciplines, including cognitive science and philosophy.<br><br>There are also a variety of views regarding the boundary between semantics and pragmatics. Some philosophers, like Morris, believe that semantics and pragmatics are two distinct topics. He says that semantics deal with the relation of words to objects that they could or may not denote, whereas pragmatics deals with the use of words in context.<br><br>Other philosophers like Bach and Harnish have suggested that pragmatism is an subfield of semantics. They define "near-side" and "far-side" pragmatics. Near-side pragmatics concerns what is said while far-side focuses on the logic implications of uttering a phrase. They claim that some of the 'pragmatics' of an utterance is already influenced by semantics, while other 'pragmatics' is defined by the processes of inference.<br><br>The context is among the most important aspects in pragmatics. This means that the same utterance can mean different things in different contexts, based on factors such as indexicality and ambiguity. Other elements that can alter the meaning of an utterance include the structure of the discourse, speaker intentions and beliefs, as well as expectations of the listener.<br><br>Another aspect of pragmatics is its cultural specificity. It is because every culture has its own rules about what is appropriate in various situations. For instance, it is polite in some cultures to make eye contact while it is rude in other cultures.<br><br>There are a variety of views of pragmatics, and a great deal of research is conducted in this field. There are a variety of areas of study,  [https://writeablog.net/foldwater0/why-we-are-in-love-with-slot-and-you-should-also 프라그마틱 슬롯무료] including pragmatics that are computational and formal theoretic and experimental pragmatism, intercultural and cross pragmatics in linguistics, and pragmatics in the clinical and experimental sense.<br><br>How does Free Pragmatics compare to Explanatory Pragmatics?<br><br>The discipline of pragmatics, a linguistic field, is concerned with the way meaning is conveyed through the use of language in a context. It examines the way in which the speaker's intentions and beliefs contribute to interpretation, with less attention paid to the grammatical aspects of the speech rather than what is said. Linguists who specialize in pragmatics are called pragmaticians. The subject of pragmatics has a link to other areas of the study of linguistics, such as semantics and syntax or  [https://firsturl.de/maBU9rx 프라그마틱 플레이] philosophy of language.<br><br>In recent years the area of pragmatics has been developing in several different directions, including computational linguistics, pragmatics in conversation, and theoretical pragmatics. There is a wide range of research conducted in these areas, addressing topics such as the role of lexical elements and the interaction between discourse and  [https://images.google.com.gt/url?q=https://telegra.ph/11-Creative-Ways-To-Write-About-Pragmatic-Slots-Free-Trial-09-18 프라그마틱 슬롯 조작] 플레이 ([https://maps.google.ae/url?q=https://blogfreely.net/coachlawyer9/14-businesses-are-doing-a-fantastic-job-at-free-slot-pragmatic https://maps.Google.ae]) language and the nature of meaning itself.<br><br>In the philosophical debate about pragmatism one of the most important questions is whether it's possible to provide a thorough and systematic explanation of the interface between semantics and pragmatics. Some philosophers have claimed that it is not (e.g. Morris 1938, Kaplan 1989). Other philosophers have argued the distinction between semantics and pragmatics isn't well-defined, and that they are the same.<br><br>The debate over these positions is usually a back and forth affair and scholars arguing that certain phenomena fall under the rubric of either semantics or pragmatics. For example certain scholars argue that if an expression has an actual truth-conditional meaning, then it is semantics. On the other hand, others believe that the fact that a statement may be interpreted in various ways is a sign of pragmatics.<br><br>Other pragmatics researchers have taken an alternative route. They claim that the truth-conditional interpretation of a sentence is only one of many possible interpretations and that all of them are valid. This is commonly referred to as far-side pragmatics.<br><br>Recent research in pragmatics has tried to combine both approaches in an effort to comprehend the full scope of the interpretive possibilities for an utterance by modeling how a speaker's intentions and beliefs affect the interpretation. For example, Champollion et al. (2019) combine the Gricean game theory model of the Rational Speech Act framework with technological advances from Franke and Bergen (2020). The model predicts that listeners will be entertained by a variety of exhausted parses of an speech that is a part of the universal FCI Any, and that is why the exclusiveness implicature is so strong when compared to other plausible implications.
What is Pragmatics?<br><br>Pragmatics studies the relationship between context and language. It addresses questions such as what do people mean by the terms they use?<br><br>It's a philosophy that is based on practical and reasonable actions. It is in contrast to idealism, the belief that you must abide by your principles.<br><br>What is Pragmatics?<br><br>The study of pragmatics focuses on how people who speak a language interact and communicate with each other. It is often thought of as a component of language, but it differs from semantics because pragmatics is focused on what the user is trying to convey and not on what the actual meaning is.<br><br>As a research area the field of pragmatics is relatively new and research in the area has been growing rapidly over the last few decades. It is primarily an academic discipline within linguistics but it also influences research in other fields such as speech-language pathology, psychology, sociolinguistics, and the study of anthropology.<br><br>There are many different perspectives on pragmatics, and they have contributed to its growth and development. One perspective is the Gricean pragmatics approach, [https://pragmatic-korea54208.blogoscience.com/35895090/20-questions-you-should-be-asking-about-how-to-check-the-authenticity-of-pragmatic-before-you-decide-to-purchase-it 무료 프라그마틱] which focuses on the notion of intention and its interaction with the speaker's knowledge of the listener's understanding. Other perspectives on pragmatics include lexical and conceptual approaches to pragmatics. These perspectives have contributed to the variety of topics that researchers in pragmatics have investigated.<br><br>Research in pragmatics has been focused on a broad range of topics that include L2 pragmatic comprehension and request production by EFL learners, and the role of theory of mind in mental and physical metaphors. It has been applied to social and cultural phenomena such as political discourse, discriminatory speech, and interpersonal communication. Researchers studying pragmatics have employed various methods from experimental to sociocultural.<br><br>The amount of knowledge base in pragmatics is different according to the database used, as shown in Figure 9A-C. The US and the UK are two of the top performers in research on pragmatics. However, their position 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>It is therefore hard to classify the top pragmatics authors according to the number of their publications. However it is possible to determine the most influential authors through analyzing their contributions to pragmatics. For example, Bambini's contribution to pragmatics is a pioneering concept such as conversational implicature, and politeness theory. Grice, Saul, and Kasper are also highly influential authors of the field of pragmatics.<br><br>What is Free Pragmatics?<br><br>The study of pragmatics is focused on the users and contexts of language usage instead of focusing on reference grammar, truth, or. It studies the ways in which one utterance can be interpreted as meaning different things from different contexts and also those caused by ambiguity or indexicality. It also focuses on the strategies employed by listeners to determine which utterances have a communicative intent. It is closely linked to the theory of conversational implicature developed by Paul Grice.<br><br>While the distinction between semantics and pragmatics is a well-known and established one, there is a lot of controversy regarding the exact boundaries of these fields. Some philosophers argue that the notion of meaning of sentences is a component of semantics, whereas other insist that this particular problem should be treated as pragmatic.<br><br>Another area of controversy is whether the study of pragmatics should be considered a branch of linguistics or an aspect of philosophy of language. Some researchers have suggested that pragmatics is an independent discipline and should be considered a part of linguistics along with the study of phonology. syntax, semantics etc. Others, however, have suggested that the study of pragmatics is an aspect of philosophy of language since it focuses on the ways in which our beliefs about the meanings and functions of language influence our theories about how languages work.<br><br>There are a few key aspects of the study of pragmatics that have fueled the debate. For instance, some researchers have suggested that pragmatics isn't a subject in its own right because it studies the ways in which people interpret and use language without using any data about what actually gets said. This type of approach is called far-side pragmatics. Certain scholars have argued that this research ought to be considered a discipline of its own since it studies how cultural and social influences influence the meaning and use language. This is known as near-side pragmatism.<br><br>Other topics of discussion in pragmatics include the way we think about the nature of the interpretation of utterances as an inferential process and the role that the primary pragmatic processes play in the analysis of what is being spoken by an individual speaker in a sentence. These are topics that are more thoroughly discussed in the papers written by Recanati and Bach. Both papers explore the notions the concept of saturation and free enrichment of the pragmatic. These are significant pragmatic processes that shape the overall meaning an utterance.<br><br>What is the difference between free and explanatory Pragmatics?<br><br>Pragmatics is the study of how context contributes to the meaning of a language. It examines the way human language is used during social interaction as well as the relationship between speaker and interpreter. Linguists who specialize in pragmatics are called pragmaticians.<br><br>A variety of theories of pragmatics have been developed over the years. Some, such as Gricean pragmatics, concentrate on the communicative intention of the speaker. Others, such as Relevance Theory, focus on the understanding processes that occur during the interpretation of words by hearers. Certain pragmatic approaches have been combined together with other disciplines such as philosophy or cognitive science.<br><br>There are also differing opinions regarding the boundaries between pragmatics and semantics. Some philosophers, such as Morris, believe that semantics and pragmatics are two separate topics. He asserts semantics is concerned with the relationship between signs and objects that they might or may not refer to, whereas pragmatics is concerned with the use of words in a context.<br><br>Other philosophers like Bach and Harnish have suggested that pragmatism is an subfield of semantics. They distinguish between "near-side" and "far-side" pragmatics. Near-side pragmatics focuses on what is said, whereas far-side focuses on the logic implications of uttering a phrase. They believe that a portion of the 'pragmatics' in an utterance is already determined by semantics, while the rest is defined by the processes of inference.<br><br>One of the most important aspects of pragmatics is that it is contextually dependent. This means that a single utterance can have different meanings based on the context, such as ambiguity or indexicality. Other factors that could alter the meaning of an expression include discourse structure, speaker intentions and beliefs, and 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 appropriate to say in various situations. In some cultures, it's acceptable to look at each other. In other cultures, it's considered rude.<br><br>There are a variety of views of pragmatics, and a lot of research is conducted in this field. Some of the main areas of research are: formal and computational pragmatics as well as experimental and theoretical pragmatics; cross-linguistic and intercultural pragmatics; and clinical and experimental pragmatics.<br><br>How is free Pragmatics similar to Explanatory Pragmatics?<br><br>The pragmatics discipline is concerned with how meaning is communicated through language 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. Pragmaticians are linguists who specialize on pragmatics. The topic of pragmatics has a connection to other areas of the study of linguistics like semantics and syntax or  [https://getidealist.com/story19762641/five-pragmatic-slots-site-projects-to-use-for-any-budget 프라그마틱 무료체험 슬롯버프] philosophy of language.<br><br>In recent years the area of pragmatics has been developing in several different directions such as computational linguistics conversational pragmatics, and theoretical pragmatics. These areas are characterized by a wide variety of research that addresses aspects like lexical features and  [https://pragmatickr13344.tusblogos.com/29906824/10-real-reasons-people-dislike-free-slot-pragmatic-free-slot-pragmatic 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천] the interplay between language, discourse, and meaning.<br><br>One of the major issues in the philosophical discussion of pragmatics is whether or not it is possible to develop an exhaustive, systematic view of the semantics/pragmatics interface. Some philosophers have argued that it's not (e.g. Morris 1938, Kaplan 1989). Other philosophers have argued the distinction between pragmatics and semantics is not clear and that they are the identical.<br><br>It is not unusual for scholars to go back and forth between these two perspectives, [https://bookmarklinkz.com/story18020357/the-most-common-pragmatic-genuine-mistake-every-beginning-pragmatic-genuine-user-makes 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천] arguing that certain phenomena fall under either pragmatics or [https://pr7bookmark.com/story18299052/what-is-pragmatic-slot-tips-what-are-the-benefits-and-how-to-make-use-of-it 프라그마틱 무료] semantics. Some scholars say that if a statement is interpreted with a literal truth conditional meaning, it is semantics. Others argue that the possibility that a statement may be interpreted differently is pragmatics.<br><br>Other researchers in pragmatics have taken a different stance in arguing that the truth-conditional meaning of an utterance is just one of the many ways in which the expression can be understood, and that all interpretations are valid. This is commonly known as far-side pragmatics.<br><br>Recent research in pragmatics has sought to combine semantic and far side approaches. It tries to capture the entire range of interpretive possibilities that can be derived from a speaker's words, by modeling the way in which the speaker's beliefs and intentions affect the interpretation. For example, Champollion et al. The 2019 version is an Gricean model of the Rational Speech Act framework, and technological advances developed by Franke and Bergen. This model predicts listeners will have to entertain a myriad of exhausted parses of a speech utterance that includes the universal FCI Any, and that is the reason why the exclusivity implicature is so robust compared to other plausible implications.

Revision as of 14:45, 24 December 2024

What is Pragmatics?

Pragmatics studies the relationship between context and language. It addresses questions such as what do people mean by the terms they use?

It's a philosophy that is based on practical and reasonable actions. It is in contrast to idealism, the belief that you must abide by your principles.

What is Pragmatics?

The study of pragmatics focuses on how people who speak a language interact and communicate with each other. It is often thought of as a component of language, but it differs from semantics because pragmatics is focused on what the user is trying to convey and not on what the actual meaning is.

As a research area the field of pragmatics is relatively new and research in the area has been growing rapidly over the last few decades. It is primarily an academic discipline within linguistics but it also influences research in other fields such as speech-language pathology, psychology, sociolinguistics, and the study of anthropology.

There are many different perspectives on pragmatics, and they have contributed to its growth and development. One perspective is the Gricean pragmatics approach, 무료 프라그마틱 which focuses on the notion of intention and its interaction with the speaker's knowledge of the listener's understanding. Other perspectives on pragmatics include lexical and conceptual approaches to pragmatics. These perspectives have contributed to the variety of topics that researchers in pragmatics have investigated.

Research in pragmatics has been focused on a broad range of topics that include L2 pragmatic comprehension and request production by EFL learners, and the role of theory of mind in mental and physical metaphors. It has been applied to social and cultural phenomena such as political discourse, discriminatory speech, and interpersonal communication. Researchers studying pragmatics have employed various methods from experimental to sociocultural.

The amount of knowledge base in pragmatics is different according to the database used, as shown in Figure 9A-C. The US and the UK are two of the top performers in research on pragmatics. However, their position 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.

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

What is Free Pragmatics?

The study of pragmatics is focused on the users and contexts of language usage instead of focusing on reference grammar, truth, or. It studies the ways in which one utterance can be interpreted as meaning different things from different contexts and also those caused by ambiguity or indexicality. It also focuses on the strategies employed by listeners to determine which utterances have a communicative intent. It is closely linked to the theory of conversational implicature developed by Paul Grice.

While the distinction between semantics and pragmatics is a well-known and established one, there is a lot of controversy regarding the exact boundaries of these fields. Some philosophers argue that the notion of meaning of sentences is a component of semantics, whereas other insist that this particular problem should be treated as pragmatic.

Another area of controversy is whether the study of pragmatics should be considered a branch of linguistics or an aspect of philosophy of language. Some researchers have suggested that pragmatics is an independent discipline and should be considered a part of linguistics along with the study of phonology. syntax, semantics etc. Others, however, have suggested that the study of pragmatics is an aspect of philosophy of language since it focuses on the ways in which our beliefs about the meanings and functions of language influence our theories about how languages work.

There are a few key aspects of the study of pragmatics that have fueled the debate. For instance, some researchers have suggested that pragmatics isn't a subject in its own right because it studies the ways in which people interpret and use language without using any data about what actually gets said. This type of approach is called far-side pragmatics. Certain scholars have argued that this research ought to be considered a discipline of its own since it studies how cultural and social influences influence the meaning and use language. This is known as near-side pragmatism.

Other topics of discussion in pragmatics include the way we think about the nature of the interpretation of utterances as an inferential process and the role that the primary pragmatic processes play in the analysis of what is being spoken by an individual speaker in a sentence. These are topics that are more thoroughly discussed in the papers written by Recanati and Bach. Both papers explore the notions the concept of saturation and free enrichment of the pragmatic. These are significant pragmatic processes that shape the overall meaning an utterance.

What is the difference between free and explanatory Pragmatics?

Pragmatics is the study of how context contributes to the meaning of a language. It examines the way human language is used during social interaction as well as the relationship between speaker and interpreter. Linguists who specialize in pragmatics are called pragmaticians.

A variety of theories of pragmatics have been developed over the years. Some, such as Gricean pragmatics, concentrate on the communicative intention of the speaker. Others, such as Relevance Theory, focus on the understanding processes that occur during the interpretation of words by hearers. Certain pragmatic approaches have been combined together with other disciplines such as philosophy or cognitive science.

There are also differing opinions regarding the boundaries between pragmatics and semantics. Some philosophers, such as Morris, believe that semantics and pragmatics are two separate topics. He asserts semantics is concerned with the relationship between signs and objects that they might or may not refer to, whereas pragmatics is concerned with the use of words in a context.

Other philosophers like Bach and Harnish have suggested that pragmatism is an subfield of semantics. They distinguish between "near-side" and "far-side" pragmatics. Near-side pragmatics focuses on what is said, whereas far-side focuses on the logic implications of uttering a phrase. They believe that a portion of the 'pragmatics' in an utterance is already determined by semantics, while the rest is defined by the processes of inference.

One of the most important aspects of pragmatics is that it is contextually dependent. This means that a single utterance can have different meanings based on the context, such as ambiguity or indexicality. Other factors that could alter the meaning of an expression include discourse structure, speaker intentions and beliefs, and expectations of the listener.

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 appropriate to say in various situations. In some cultures, it's acceptable to look at each other. In other cultures, it's considered rude.

There are a variety of views of pragmatics, and a lot of research is conducted in this field. Some of the main areas of research are: formal and computational pragmatics as well as experimental and theoretical pragmatics; cross-linguistic and intercultural pragmatics; and clinical and experimental pragmatics.

How is free Pragmatics similar to Explanatory Pragmatics?

The pragmatics discipline is concerned with how meaning is communicated through language 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. Pragmaticians are linguists who specialize on pragmatics. The topic of pragmatics has a connection to other areas of the study of linguistics like semantics and syntax or 프라그마틱 무료체험 슬롯버프 philosophy of language.

In recent years the area of pragmatics has been developing in several different directions such as computational linguistics conversational pragmatics, and theoretical pragmatics. These areas are characterized by a wide variety of research that addresses aspects like lexical features and 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 the interplay between language, discourse, and meaning.

One of the major issues in the philosophical discussion of pragmatics is whether or not it is possible to develop an exhaustive, systematic view of the semantics/pragmatics interface. Some philosophers have argued that it's not (e.g. Morris 1938, Kaplan 1989). Other philosophers have argued the distinction between pragmatics and semantics is not clear and that they are the identical.

It is not unusual for scholars to go back and forth between these two perspectives, 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 arguing that certain phenomena fall under either pragmatics or 프라그마틱 무료 semantics. Some scholars say that if a statement is interpreted with a literal truth conditional meaning, it is semantics. Others argue that the possibility that a statement may be interpreted differently is pragmatics.

Other researchers in pragmatics have taken a different stance in arguing that the truth-conditional meaning of an utterance is just one of the many ways in which the expression can be understood, and that all interpretations are valid. This is commonly known as far-side pragmatics.

Recent research in pragmatics has sought to combine semantic and far side approaches. It tries to capture the entire range of interpretive possibilities that can be derived from a speaker's words, by modeling the way in which the speaker's beliefs and intentions affect the interpretation. For example, Champollion et al. The 2019 version is an Gricean model of the Rational Speech Act framework, and technological advances developed by Franke and Bergen. This model predicts listeners will have to entertain a myriad of exhausted parses of a speech utterance that includes the universal FCI Any, and that is the reason why the exclusivity implicature is so robust compared to other plausible implications.