Tortured Meaning In Hindi

July 18, 2023 Post a Comment

Tortured Meaning In Hindi. And torturing and killing young women. Looking for the meaning of tortured in hindi?

Images of Kashmiri Man Tortured by Indian Army Revealed to Be Scenes from sputniknews.com

The Problems With Reality-Conditional Theories for Meaning
The relationship between a symbol as well as its significance is called"the theory on meaning. It is in this essay that we will discuss the challenges of truth-conditional theories of meaning, Grice's examination of meaning-of-the-speaker, and its semantic theory on truth. We will also discuss arguments against Tarski's theory on truth.

Arguments against truth-conditional theories of significance
Truth-conditional theories on meaning state that meaning is the result of the elements of truth. This theory, however, limits the meaning of linguistic phenomena to. The argument of Davidson is that truth-values aren't always truthful. Therefore, we must be able to distinguish between truth and flat statement.
Epistemic Determination Argument Epistemic Determination Argument is a method to argue for truth-conditional theories on meaning. It relies upon two fundamental assumptions: the existence of all non-linguistic facts, and understanding of the truth-condition. However, Daniel Cohnitz has argued against these assumptions. So, his argument doesn't have merit.
Another common concern with these theories is the impossibility of the concept of. But this is solved by mentalist analysis. This is where meaning is evaluated in ways of an image of the mind, instead of the meaning intended. For example there are people who have different meanings of the same word if the same person uses the same word in various contexts, however the meanings that are associated with these words could be identical for a person who uses the same word in both contexts.

The majority of the theories of interpretation attempt to explain the nature of what is meant in terms of mental content, non-mentalist theories are often pursued. This may be due to the skepticism towards mentalist theories. They also may be pursued as a result of the belief mental representation should be assessed in terms of the representation of language.
A key defender of this view is Robert Brandom. This philosopher believes that the nature of sentences is dependent on its social context as well as that speech actions with a sentence make sense in what context in the setting in which they're used. This is why he has devised an understanding of pragmatics to explain the meaning of sentences using socio-cultural norms and normative positions.

Grice's analysis of speaker-meaning
Grice's analysis to understand speaker-meaning places significant emphasis on the utterer's intention and the relationship to the meaning of the statement. Grice argues that intention is a complex mental condition which must be understood in order to determine the meaning of a sentence. But, this argument violates speaker centrism in that it analyzes U-meaning without considering M-intentions. In addition, Grice fails to account for the reality that M-intentions can be constrained to just two or one.
In addition, the analysis of Grice does not take into account some important cases of intuitional communication. For instance, in the photograph example from earlier, the speaker doesn't make it clear whether they were referring to Bob the wife of his. This is an issue because Andy's picture does not indicate whether Bob himself or the wife is not faithful.
Although Grice believes that speaker-meaning is more important than sentence-meaning, there's some debate to be had. In reality, the difference is essential to the naturalistic legitimacy of non-natural meaning. In reality, the aim of Grice is to give naturalistic explanations and explanations for these non-natural significance.

In order to comprehend a communicative action it is essential to understand how the speaker intends to communicate, as that intention is complex in its embedding of intentions and beliefs. However, we seldom make complex inferences about mental states in common communication. In the end, Grice's assessment of meaning of the speaker is not compatible with the psychological processes involved in language understanding.
While Grice's account of speaker-meaning is a plausible explanation of the process, it is but far from complete. Others, like Bennett, Loar, and Schiffer, have provided deeper explanations. These explanations reduce the credibility that is the Gricean theory since they treat communication as a rational activity. The basic idea is that audiences be convinced that the speaker's message is true due to the fact that they understand the speaker's intent.
In addition, it fails to account for all types of speech acts. Grice's study also fails be aware of the fact speech actions are often used to explain the meaning of a sentence. In the end, the meaning of a sentence can be reduced to what the speaker is saying about it.

Problems with Tarski's semantic theory of truth
While Tarski believes that sentences are truth bearers However, this doesn't mean it is necessary for a sentence to always be true. Instead, he sought to define what is "true" in a specific context. His theory has become an integral part of contemporary logic and is classified as a correspondence or deflationary.
One drawback with the theory for truth is it can't be applied to a natural language. This is because of Tarski's undefinability theory, which claims that no bivalent one could contain its own predicate. Although English might appear to be an an exception to this rule This is not in contradiction with Tarski's view that all natural languages are closed semantically.
But, Tarski leaves many implicit restrictions on his theories. For example, a theory must not contain false statements or instances of the form T. Also, theories should avoid it being subject to the Liar paradox. Another issue with Tarski's concept is that it isn't aligned with the theories of traditional philosophers. It is also unable to explain every aspect of truth in the terms of common sense. This is a significant issue to any theory of truth.

The second problem is that Tarski's definitions for truth calls for the use of concepts from set theory and syntax. They're not the right choice when looking at endless languages. Henkin's language style is well established, however the style of language does not match Tarski's definition of truth.
It is controversial because it fails reflect the complexity of the truth. For instance: truth cannot play the role of a predicate in an interpretive theory, and Tarski's axioms cannot be used to explain the language of primitives. Furthermore, the definition he gives of truth isn't compatible with the notion of truth in understanding theories.
However, these problems do not mean that Tarski is not capable of using the definitions of his truth and it does not conform to the definition of'satisfaction. In fact, the exact definition of the word truth isn't quite as clear and is dependent on peculiarities of language objects. If you're interested in learning more, look up Thoralf's 1919 paper.

Problems with Grice's analysis of sentence-meaning
The problems with Grice's analysis of sentence meanings can be summarized in two main areas. In the first place, the intention of the speaker has to be recognized. Second, the speaker's utterance must be supported with evidence that proves the intended result. But these requirements aren't in all cases. in every case.
The problem can be addressed by changing Grice's analysis of sentence-meaning to include the significance of sentences that do have no intentionality. This analysis also rests on the premise that sentences are complex entities that comprise a number of basic elements. So, the Gricean analysis isn't able to identify contradictory examples.

This argument is especially problematic in light of Grice's distinction between meaning of the speaker and sentence. This distinction is crucial to any plausible naturalist account of the meaning of a sentence. This theory is also vital in the theory of implicature in conversation. The year was 1957. Grice gave a foundational theory for meaning that expanded upon in later publications. The fundamental concept of significance in Grice's work is to think about the speaker's motives in determining what message the speaker intends to convey.
Another issue with Grice's model is that it does not account for intuitive communication. For example, in Grice's example, it is not clear what Andy really means when he asserts that Bob is not faithful and unfaithful to wife. Yet, there are many variations of intuitive communication which do not fit into Grice's theory.

The main claim of Grice's argument is that the speaker has to be intending to create an emotion in your audience. But this claim is not scientifically rigorous. Grice adjusts the cutoff with respect to indeterminate cognitive capacities of the partner and on the nature of communication.
The sentence-meaning explanation proposed by Grice does not seem to be very plausible, though it's a plausible account. Other researchers have created more specific explanations of meaning, but they seem less plausible. In addition, Grice views communication as an act of reason. Audiences form their opinions through their awareness of the speaker's intent.

What is meaning of torture in hindi dictionary? Mar 07, 2020 • 1 view. As, to torture an accused person.

T.) To Punish With Torture;

Click for more detailed meaning of tortured in hindi with examples, definition, pronunciation and example sentences. Know the meaning of the tortured word in hindi with this amazing online english to hindi dictionary. Tortured meaning in hindi is saṃtapt संतप्त.

Only To End Up Being Tortured By Their Heroes.

Tortured शब्द के हिंदी अर्थ का उदाहरण: Oneindia hindi dictionary offers the meaning of tortured in hindi with pronunciation, synonyms, antonyms, adjective and. Over 100,000 hindi translations of english words and phrases.