Conclusion
The emotive-assertion analysis must be distinguished from interjections such as Ouch! and Wow!, which lack independent asserted content and instead comment on a target proposition or question.
View claim pageArgument
The emotive-assertion analysis must be distinguished from interjections such as Ouch! and Wow!, which lack independent asserted content and instead comment on a target proposition or question.
⟨ ⟩Classification/Definition
Premises (7)
- Expressive interjections are not assertions, as illustrated by the infelicity of responses such as “Me too!” and “Yeah, it is obvious” to standalone Ouch! or Wow!.Evidence for this premise (2)The landscape of exclamations: brief musings on emotive language — Interjections as super-linguistic verbal emojis rather than emotive assertionsWe agree completely that expressive interjections are not assertions.https://doi.org/10.1515/tl-2025-2008#unit-4-p1The landscape of exclamations: brief musings on emotive language — Interjections as super-linguistic verbal emojis rather than emotive assertionsWe agree completely that expressive interjections are not assertions.https://doi.org/10.1515/tl-2025-2008#unit-4-p1
- Interjections can occur with distinct speech-act types, including questions and commands, rather than being restricted to assertions.Evidence for this premise (2)The landscape of exclamations: brief musings on emotive language — Interjections as super-linguistic verbal emojis rather than emotive assertionsthose interjections can apply to different kinds of speech actshttps://doi.org/10.1515/tl-2025-2008#unit-4-p4The landscape of exclamations: brief musings on emotive language — Interjections as super-linguistic verbal emojis rather than emotive assertionsthose interjections can apply to different kinds of speech actshttps://doi.org/10.1515/tl-2025-2008#unit-4-p4
- Face emojis have a use in which they comment on a target proposition expressed by accompanying text instead of making an independent contribution to discourse, and they too combine with various speech acts.Evidence for this premise (2)The landscape of exclamations: brief musings on emotive language — Interjections as super-linguistic verbal emojis rather than emotive assertionsthey comment on a target proposition expressed by the accompanying text, as opposed to making an independent contribution to discourse.https://doi.org/10.1515/tl-2025-2008#unit-4-p5The landscape of exclamations: brief musings on emotive language — Interjections as super-linguistic verbal emojis rather than emotive assertionsthey comment on a target proposition expressed by the accompanying text, as opposed to making an independent contribution to discourse.https://doi.org/10.1515/tl-2025-2008#unit-4-p5
- In the proposed assertion case, “Wow” takes the asserted proposition that the movie is good as its argument, comments on it, and conveys that the speaker is happy about it.Evidence for this premise (2)The landscape of exclamations: brief musings on emotive language — Interjections as super-linguistic verbal emojis rather than emotive assertionsWow comments on p and conveys that the speaker is happy about phttps://doi.org/10.1515/tl-2025-2008#unit-4-p7The landscape of exclamations: brief musings on emotive language — Interjections as super-linguistic verbal emojis rather than emotive assertionsWow comments on p and conveys that the speaker is happy about phttps://doi.org/10.1515/tl-2025-2008#unit-4-p7
- On Grosz et al.'s account, emojis contribute information about participants' affective attitudes toward propositions expressed by linguistic discourse components.Evidence for this premise (2)The landscape of exclamations: brief musings on emotive language — Interjections as super-linguistic verbal emojis rather than emotive assertionsemojis contribute information about the participants’ affective attitudes towards propositionshttps://doi.org/10.1515/tl-2025-2008#unit-4-p6The landscape of exclamations: brief musings on emotive language — Interjections as super-linguistic verbal emojis rather than emotive assertionsemojis contribute information about the participants’ affective attitudes towards propositionshttps://doi.org/10.1515/tl-2025-2008#unit-4-p6
- The additional proposition supplies the actual content, while the interjection is complementary to that content, as discussed for gestures.Evidence for this premise (2)The landscape of exclamations: brief musings on emotive language — Interjections as super-linguistic verbal emojis rather than emotive assertionsit is the additional proposition that gives that actual contenthttps://doi.org/10.1515/tl-2025-2008#unit-4-p3The landscape of exclamations: brief musings on emotive language — Interjections as super-linguistic verbal emojis rather than emotive assertionsit is the additional proposition that gives that actual contenthttps://doi.org/10.1515/tl-2025-2008#unit-4-p3
Challenges & responses (0)
No one has tested this argument yet.
An unopposed argument is untested, not proven. Filing a rebut, undercut, or undermine is how its standing gets earned.
Pending critical questions (1)
These are challenges this argument’s reasoning pattern must still withstand. Answering them on Isonomia strengthens the argument.
- Does the case fit the category?Open
Cited by
Cited by 1 · 0 contests
Builds on this (1)
Contests this (0)
No contest on file yet.
Embed this argument
<iframe src="https://www.isonomia.app/embed/argument/Bn133g9S" width="600" height="400" frameborder="0" style="border:1px solid #e5e7eb;border-radius:8px;" title="Isonomia Argument" loading="lazy"></iframe>
Copy and paste into any website or forum that supports HTML.
Join the deliberation on Isonomia
Support, challenge, or extend this argument with structured reasoning in Isonomia.