"Of course, depending on the particular intentionalities of meaning,
reality is at times presented inaccurately or distorted."

Compare with this:
"Linguistic meaning is "a real form of intentionality"; though it's not "intrinsic" – it is extrinsicor as-if. It's dependent upon the intentionality of those who use linguistic meanings. That is, on us. Thus linguistic meaning is also dependent upon consciousness, which has intrinsic intentionality and is intrinsic in and of itself. "http://paulaustinmurphypam.blogspot.com/2014/10/searle-on-as...

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 1 day 9 hrs (2021-04-16 03:55:03 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

Not sure that many German native speakers (or authors for that matter) would use "Bedeutungsintention" in an everyday context because, unlike "intended meaning" it simply isn't an everyday term. It is, in fact, a "highly philosophical term" (compare: ‘Intentionality’ is a philosopher’s word" https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/intentionality/): many hits will bring up Husserl; and if you google "intentionalities", their won't be as many references, but there's still no escaping from Husserl and aspects of phenomenology. (See extensive quote at end).
But don't take my word for it. Plug in "intended meaning" and see what you get:

"Of course, depending on the particular meaning intended, reality is occasionally misrepresented or distorted."

That seems as insightful as suggesting 'depending on what you are about to say, you will be either right or wrong.' But this shouldn't be about literal meaning here but rather about intentionality being inherent in any utterance as such.

"Phenomenology demonstrated that despite its extreme diversity and apparent “messiness,” every kind of consciousness has a fundamental organizing principle, which is called “intentionality.” The presence of this structure distinguishes experience from all other things. Intentionality entails a relationship of directedness-at, or aboutness: while all things in the universe show up as themselves, consciousness is what shows them – that is, shows things other than itself. Edmund Husserl, who dedicated most of his research to clarifying intentionality, and following him the phenomenologists of life Michel Henry and Anna-Teresa Tymieniecka also, stated that experiencing is a property of life. Since human beings are alive, they are subjects of experience: that is, experiencers. Intentionality of consciousness gives human subjects knowledge of things other than themselves. Hence, Husserl suggested that the framework for the analysis of experience should be experien- cer–experiencing–the experienced (ego-cogito-cogitatum, Fig. 1). Analysis can be aimed at any segment within the structure. For example, the phrase “I feel well” points to wellbeing in the self and in the feeling – that is, in the experiencer and in experiencing, as opposed to what is experienced: wellbeing is not an object, which one can have an experience of. Experience of wellbeing is not an experience of something, like tasting ice cream or celebrating successful sales. It is not even an experience of something within, even though a positive emotion, a sense of certainty and truth, or clarity of thinking, comes as part of such experiencing. Phenomenologically, wellbeing must be “located” in the ego and in the cogito – that is, in the experiencer and in experiencing. Hence, in order to generate wellbeing, traditional practices attempt to modify the sense of self and the ways self-relates to the objects of experience.

Living in the flow of experience like fish in water and being identical with the content of experience, a person does not notice such structures. Often, they are mistaken for abstractions (which they are not; these are descriptions of empirical, real elements of consciousness). However, one is always aware of changes in experience: this is why practices of wisdom traditions never point to static structures but always work with the change of experience toward everlasting wellbeing, which would be independent of circumstances. Such changes must engage the deep structures of experience, because otherwise, the changes would not hold. The sequence of internal mental moves in such restructuring is always repetitive from person to person and presents a temporal structure of the process, which can be replicated in a business setting.

Unfolding in time, the experience of wellbeing has two levels of organization (Fig. 1): the order of active constitution and the order of passive synthesis. In the order of active constitution, the ego creates intentionalities, which reach their respective objects and assemble the whole meaning of experience. In the order of passive synthesis, intentionality is present less, and experience has more of the input of the senses; in creating its intentionalities of meaning, the ego works off the datum of passive syntheses. For example, we perceive not a table but only a side of it. Then, the constituting ego stitches together multiple snapshots (so-called adumbrations) of the sides of the table, digs into memories and associations, incorporates information from others who also perceive the same set of objects and share the same world, verifies the collected unity of meaning versus the idea of a table (the essence), and . . . voila! one recognizes a table. This whole process happens momentarily, and so we do not consciously experience the details – only the outcome." https://www.academia.edu/42046049/Wellbeing_and_Spirituality...