The shared effects make the equation initially plausible, but they do not by themselves show that exclamatives and emotive assertions are structurally or functionally identical.

The shared effects make the equation initially plausible, but they do not by themselves show that exclamatives and emotive assertions are structurally or functionally identical.

• Trotzke and Giannakidou's target analysis equates exclamatives with emotive assertions, including a silent emotive-predicate structure, partly on their apparent shared surprise effects and question–answer behavior.
• Trotzke and Giannakidou argue that exclamatives are emotive assertions.
  Evidence for this premise (5)

  Empirical and theoretical arguments against equating exclamatives and emotive assertions — Framing the dispute: exclamatives versus emotive assertions

  Trotzke and Giannakidou (in the following T & G) argue that exclamatives are emotive assertions.

  https://doi.org/10.1515/tl-2025-2001#unit-1-p1

  Empirical and theoretical arguments against equating exclamatives and emotive assertions — Framing the dispute: exclamatives versus emotive assertions

  Trotzke and Giannakidou (in the following T & G) argue that exclamatives are emotive assertions.

  https://doi.org/10.1515/tl-2025-2001#unit-1-p1

  Empirical and theoretical arguments against equating exclamatives and emotive assertions — Framing the dispute: exclamatives versus emotive assertions

  Trotzke and Giannakidou (in the following T & G) argue that exclamatives are emotive assertions.

  https://doi.org/10.1515/tl-2025-2001#unit-1-p1

  Empirical and theoretical arguments against equating exclamatives and emotive assertions — Target equation and argumentative roadmap

  Trotzke and Giannakidou (in the following T & G) argue that exclamatives are emotive assertions.

  https://doi.org/10.1515/tl-2025-2001#unit-1-p1

  Empirical and theoretical arguments against equating exclamatives and emotive assertions — Target equation and argumentative roadmap

  Trotzke and Giannakidou (in the following T & G) argue that exclamatives are emotive assertions.

  https://doi.org/10.1515/tl-2025-2001#unit-1-p1
• Their proposal treats a root exclamative as equivalent both to a subordinate clause embedded under an emotive predicate and to a declarative exclamation.
  Evidence for this premise (3)

  Empirical and theoretical arguments against equating exclamatives and emotive assertions — Framing the dispute: exclamatives versus emotive assertions

  examples such as (1a) are considered equivalent to subordinate clauses embedded under an emotive matrix predicate (1b) and also to declarative exclamations (1c)

  https://doi.org/10.1515/tl-2025-2001#unit-1-p2

  Empirical and theoretical arguments against equating exclamatives and emotive assertions — Framing the dispute: exclamatives versus emotive assertions

  examples such as (1a) are considered equivalent to subordinate clauses embedded under an emotive matrix predicate (1b) and also to declarative exclamations (1c)

  https://doi.org/10.1515/tl-2025-2001#unit-1-p2

  Empirical and theoretical arguments against equating exclamatives and emotive assertions — Framing the dispute: exclamatives versus emotive assertions

  examples such as (1a) are considered equivalent to subordinate clauses embedded under an emotive matrix predicate (1b) and also to declarative exclamations (1c)

  https://doi.org/10.1515/tl-2025-2001#unit-1-p2
• Trotzke and Giannakidou’s uniform analysis is intended to avoid positing exclamatives as a distinct sentence type with its own illocutionary force.
  Evidence for this premise (3)

  Empirical and theoretical arguments against equating exclamatives and emotive assertions — Framing the dispute: exclamatives versus emotive assertions

  The proposal captures this intuition within a uniform approach and thus avoids the assumption that exclamatives form a separate sentence type with its own illocutionary force.

  https://doi.org/10.1515/tl-2025-2001#unit-1-p4

  Empirical and theoretical arguments against equating exclamatives and emotive assertions — Framing the dispute: exclamatives versus emotive assertions

  The proposal captures this intuition within a uniform approach and thus avoids the assumption that exclamatives form a separate sentence type with its own illocutionary force.

  https://doi.org/10.1515/tl-2025-2001#unit-1-p4

  Empirical and theoretical arguments against equating exclamatives and emotive assertions — Framing the dispute: exclamatives versus emotive assertions

  The proposal captures this intuition within a uniform approach and thus avoids the assumption that exclamatives form a separate sentence type with its own illocutionary force.

  https://doi.org/10.1515/tl-2025-2001#unit-1-p4
• The proposed equivalence is initially intuitively plausible because all of the illustrated structures convey speaker surprise at Ada’s speed.
  Evidence for this premise (3)

  Empirical and theoretical arguments against equating exclamatives and emotive assertions — Framing the dispute: exclamatives versus emotive assertions

  Intuitively, all structures convey that the speaker is surprised at Ada’s speed.

  https://doi.org/10.1515/tl-2025-2001#unit-1-p3

  Empirical and theoretical arguments against equating exclamatives and emotive assertions — Framing the dispute: exclamatives versus emotive assertions

  Intuitively, all structures convey that the speaker is surprised at Ada’s speed.

  https://doi.org/10.1515/tl-2025-2001#unit-1-p3

  Empirical and theoretical arguments against equating exclamatives and emotive assertions — Framing the dispute: exclamatives versus emotive assertions

  Intuitively, all structures convey that the speaker is surprised at Ada’s speed.

  https://doi.org/10.1515/tl-2025-2001#unit-1-p3
• Their broader assumption is that, under suitable discourse conditions, exclamatives can answer information-seeking questions.
  Evidence for this premise (3)

  Empirical and theoretical arguments against equating exclamatives and emotive assertions — Framing the dispute: exclamatives versus emotive assertions

  exclamatives can answer information-seeking questions if the discourse conditions are appropriate

  https://doi.org/10.1515/tl-2025-2001#unit-1-p6

  Empirical and theoretical arguments against equating exclamatives and emotive assertions — Framing the dispute: exclamatives versus emotive assertions

  exclamatives can answer information-seeking questions if the discourse conditions are appropriate

  https://doi.org/10.1515/tl-2025-2001#unit-1-p6

  Empirical and theoretical arguments against equating exclamatives and emotive assertions — Framing the dispute: exclamatives versus emotive assertions

  exclamatives can answer information-seeking questions if the discourse conditions are appropriate

  https://doi.org/10.1515/tl-2025-2001#unit-1-p6
• As empirical support, Trotzke and Giannakidou argue that exclamatives pattern with emotive assertions in question–answer pairs.
  Evidence for this premise (3)

  Empirical and theoretical arguments against equating exclamatives and emotive assertions — Framing the dispute: exclamatives versus emotive assertions

  T & G (p. 38f. and Sect. 2.3) argue that exclamatives pattern with emotive assertions in question – answer pairs

  https://doi.org/10.1515/tl-2025-2001#unit-1-p5

  Empirical and theoretical arguments against equating exclamatives and emotive assertions — Framing the dispute: exclamatives versus emotive assertions

  T & G (p. 38f. and Sect. 2.3) argue that exclamatives pattern with emotive assertions in question – answer pairs

  https://doi.org/10.1515/tl-2025-2001#unit-1-p5

  Empirical and theoretical arguments against equating exclamatives and emotive assertions — Framing the dispute: exclamatives versus emotive assertions

  T & G (p. 38f. and Sect. 2.3) argue that exclamatives pattern with emotive assertions in question – answer pairs

  https://doi.org/10.1515/tl-2025-2001#unit-1-p5

These are challenges this argument’s reasoning pattern must still withstand. Answering them on Isonomia strengthens the argument.

• Is the literature really agreed that defects of kind K bias inferences in direction B, or is the bias direction itself contested?Open
• Does study S actually have defect D, or is the description of S inaccurate?Open
• Is the expected magnitude of the bias from D large enough to overturn S's reported effect, or is the effect robust to plausible bias corrections?Open
• Has S (or a follow-up study) performed a robustness check or sensitivity analysis that addresses defect D directly?Open
• Is this critique applied consistently — i.e., would it apply to studies on the other side of the debate that share the same defect kind K?Open
• Is H supported by independent studies that do not share defect D, such that S's defect does not undermine H itself?Open

Cited by 1 · 0 contests