Sentences elicit different interpretations and reactions among readers, especially when there is ambiguity in their implicit layers. We present a first-of-its kind dataset of sentences from Reddit, where each sentence is annotated with multiple interpretations of its meanings, understandings of implicit moral judgments about mentioned people, and reader impressions of its author. Scrutiny of the dataset proves the evoked variability and polarity in reactions. It further shows that readers strongly disagree on both the presence of implied judgments and the social acceptability of the behaviors they evaluate. In all, the dataset offers a valuable resource for socially grounding language and modeling the intricacies of implicit language understanding from multiple reader perspectives.

Leveraging contextual knowledge has become standard practice in automated claim verification, yet the impact of temporal reasoning has been largely overlooked. Our study demonstrates that time positively influences the claim verification process of evidence-based fact-checking. The temporal aspects and relations between claims and evidence are first established through grounding on shared timelines, which are constructed using publication dates and time expressions extracted from their text. Temporal information is then provided to RNN-based and Transformer-based classifiers before or after claim and evidence encoding. Our time-aware fact-checking models surpass base models by up to 9% Micro F1 (64.17%) and 15% Macro F1 (47.43%) on the MultiFC dataset. They also outperform prior methods that explicitly model temporal relations between evidence. Our findings show that the presence of temporal information and the manner in which timelines are constructed greatly influence how fact-checking models determine the relevance and supporting or refuting character of evidence documents.