Hearer used in a sentence

Hearer in a sentence as a noun

No hearer.\nWhen seeing the sight, there is just the sight.

You are assuming that the hearer would be offended or hurt.

Fortunately, the hearer assumes that the speaker is rational and listens between the lines.

We are talking about an ideal speaker-hearer situation.

Conversational protocol dictates the hearer engage with what was said.

But I kept referring to the surgeon by the "gender neutral" pronoun "he".In that case you would indeed be deliberately misleading your hearer.

The ideal speaker-hearer is as worthy a topic of scientific study as a unicorn: nothing more than a thought experiment.

The underlying rationale is that the hearer not be given a command but simply be asked or advised about one of the necessary conditions for passing the salt.

While anything that a speaker and hearer agree has meaning can be considered a word, there is definitely a separate matter of blending in to a particular linguistic context.

Just because someone has a different opinion and expresses it doesn't mean the hearer is hurt and suffering to any degree that has a snowball's chance in **** of overwhelming the right to have and express a different opinion.

But I think "understanding natural language" is one of the easier ones, at least inasmuch as we can resort to referring to the intentions of the speaker, and understanding being the congruence between that and the hearer's impression of it.

Instead they're just guessing that it's RF-related... but then the article goes on to discuss a bunch of sources of low frequency acoustic noise?> For instance, multiple Hum hearers, if in the same room together, will match the Hum to different acoustic frequencies.

Like a fellow out in nature watching birds from afar and suddenly seeing them up close and vividly through magnification, your hearer or reader will find himself drawn close to what might otherwise be a distant narrative through stories that enliven the very things he is eager to see.

It's an interesting story but the whole investigation seems rather slipshod.> “The bulk of the evidence suggests that the Hum is not an acoustic sound.” He explained: “This is indicated by the simple fact that most people do not hear it.”Surely it would be trivial to set up a sensitive microphone, record some samples when a "hum-hearer" says it's happening, and analyze the frequency spectrum?