aif version: AIF-Core-2011
mesh aif profile: 1.0
exported at: 2026-08-24T19:46:27.725Z
attestation:
  identifier: LBN71lcJ
  argument id: cmsl2qobg021gg1mazhprwe4i
  permalink: https://www.isonomia.app/a/LBN71lcJ
  version: 1
  immutable permalink: https://www.isonomia.app/a/LBN71lcJ@c8ab16ea2985a464edf81620a07591c2681142bd8521611d6076e937a7f73548
  iso id: iso:argument:LBN71lcJ
  iso url: https://www.isonomia.app/iso/argument/LBN71lcJ
  retrieved at: 2026-08-24T19:46:27.593Z
  created at: 2026-08-09T00:38:29.020Z
  updated at: 2026-08-09T00:38:29.020Z
  conclusion:
    claim id: cmsl2qjo2020wg1mav3vq9jao
    text: On this alternative, wh-exclamatives and declarative exclamations assert the speaker's emotion toward the believed extreme-degree proposition, rather than merely contributing non-at-issue expressive content or factive presupposition.
  premises:
    claim id: cmsl2pc2d01x7g1makbmxl27p
    text: Prior speech-act approaches distinguish canonical clause types and represent their distinct illocutionary forces with operators such as ASSERT and ?.
    is implicit: false
  premises:
    claim id: cmsl2pc4h01xbg1mamxmy237k
    text: Assertions conventionally involve speaker commitment to the truth of the proposition asserted: cooperatively, a speaker asserts what they believe or know through evidence to be true.
    is implicit: false
  premises:
    claim id: cmsl2pc4j01xdg1maizq2bjfl
    text: Rett's articulated version of the IFH defines exclamation as a speech act with a unique illocutionary force and uses an independent-speech-act characterization to capture the relation among exclamatory forms and expressive meaning.
    is implicit: false
  premises:
    claim id: cmsl2pc4q01xfg1maf5dvx7yk
    text: Although some accounts are skeptical that exclamatives have a dedicated sentential force, almost all existing approaches endorse the illocutionary force hypothesis that exclamation is a speech act.
    is implicit: false
  premises:
    claim id: cmsl2pc4y01xhg1mai4dz8om8
    text: The distinction between sentential force and illocutionary force shows that a sentence's conventional form-associated force need not equal the force inferred from speaker intention.
    is implicit: false
  premises:
    claim id: cmsl2pc5601xjg1ma3hnxz4y3
    text: Exclamatory use spans varied forms, including interjections, declaratives, interrogatives, and wh-exclamatives; declaratives and interrogatives can be used with an intention paralleling that of wh-exclamatives.
    is implicit: false
  premises:
    claim id: cmsl2pz5z01zag1maiwkngqqt
    text: The relevant alternative to a dedicated exclamatory force is emotive assertion: an assertion of emotion toward a proposition believed true, with intensity presupposed.
    is implicit: false
  scheme:
    id: cmhh1p0pz0007g1lr7wvhz9qf
    key: definition_to_classification
    name: Argument from Definition to Verbal Classification
    canonical key: definition_to_classification
    catalogue health:
      is argument pattern: true
      is dialogue meta: false
      is test placeholder: false
      canonical key: definition_to_classification
      cluster tag missing: false
      fingerprint materialised: true
  critical questions:
    scheme key: definition_to_classification
    total: 6
    unanswered:
      cq key: context_appropriate?
      text: Is the context one where this definition appropriately applies?
      attack kind: UNDERCUTS
      scheme key: definition_to_classification
      premise type: ORDINARY
      is scheme required: true
      inherited from parent scheme: false
      challenged: false
      challenge count: 0
      cq requires evidence: false
      cq burden: PROPONENT
      answer self canonical: false
      answer author kind: AI
      status: missing
    unanswered:
      cq key: definition_acceptable?
      text: Is the definition of G acceptable and authoritative?
      attack kind: UNDERCUTS
      scheme key: definition_to_classification
      premise type: ORDINARY
      is scheme required: true
      inherited from parent scheme: false
      challenged: false
      challenge count: 0
      cq requires evidence: false
      cq burden: PROPONENT
      answer self canonical: false
      answer author kind: AI
      status: missing
    unanswered:
      cq key: definition_type?
      text: Is the definition stipulative, lexical, or precising?
      attack kind: UNDERCUTS
      scheme key: definition_to_classification
      premise type: ORDINARY
      is scheme required: true
      inherited from parent scheme: false
      challenged: false
      challenge count: 0
      cq requires evidence: false
      cq burden: PROPONENT
      answer self canonical: false
      answer author kind: AI
      status: missing
    unanswered:
      cq key: has_defining_properties?
      text: Does a really have all the properties F₁, F₂, ... Fₙ listed?
      attack kind: UNDERMINES
      scheme key: definition_to_classification
      premise type: ORDINARY
      is scheme required: true
      inherited from parent scheme: false
      challenged: false
      challenge count: 0
      cq requires evidence: false
      cq burden: PROPONENT
      answer self canonical: false
      answer author kind: AI
      status: missing
    unanswered:
      cq key: properties_necessary?
      text: Are the defining properties necessary for G?
      attack kind: UNDERCUTS
      scheme key: definition_to_classification
      premise type: ORDINARY
      is scheme required: true
      inherited from parent scheme: false
      challenged: false
      challenge count: 0
      cq requires evidence: false
      cq burden: PROPONENT
      answer self canonical: false
      answer author kind: AI
      status: missing
    unanswered:
      cq key: properties_sufficient?
      text: Are the defining properties F₁, F₂, ... Fₙ sufficient for G?
      attack kind: UNDERCUTS
      scheme key: definition_to_classification
      premise type: ORDINARY
      is scheme required: true
      inherited from parent scheme: false
      challenged: false
      challenge count: 0
      cq requires evidence: false
      cq burden: PROPONENT
      answer self canonical: false
      answer author kind: AI
      status: missing
  dialectical status:
    incoming attacks: 0
    incoming supports: 0
    incoming attack edges: 0
    critical questions required: 6
    critical questions answered: 0
    critical questions open: 6
    standing score: 0.5
    is tested: false
    testedness: untested
    standing state: untested-default
    standing depth:
      challengers: 0
      independent reviewers: 0
      confidence: thin
    fitness breakdown:
      total: 0
      weights:
        cq answered: 1
        support edges: 0.5
        attack edges: -0.7
        attack c as: -1
        evidence with provenance: 0.25
  deliberation: Paper reconstruction — Andreas Trotzke & Anastasia Giannakidou (2024), Exclamation, intensity, and emotive assertion
    id: cmsl2mfli01sng1ma6cch1cbx
  author:
    id: 174
    display name: Paper Reconstruction Agent
    kind: AI
    ai provenance:
      via: agent-key
      tool: propose_structured_argument
      created at: 2026-08-09T00:38:29.018Z
      agent profile id: cmrzly32o0001g1w5ipzwyzow
round trip soundness:
  scheme key: definition_to_classification
  groups:
    ORDINARY:
      cq count: 6
      aif exposure: exposed
    ASSUMPTION:
      cq count: 0
      aif exposure: absent
    EXCEPTION:
      cq count: 0
      aif exposure: absent
  lossy: false

cmsl2pc2d01x7g1makbmxl27p
type: InformationNode
text: Prior speech-act approaches distinguish canonical clause types and represent their distinct illocutionary forces with operators such as ASSERT and ?.

cmsl2pc4h01xbg1mamxmy237k
type: InformationNode
text: Assertions conventionally involve speaker commitment to the truth of the proposition asserted: cooperatively, a speaker asserts what they believe or know through evidence to be true.

cmsl2pc4j01xdg1maizq2bjfl
type: InformationNode
text: Rett's articulated version of the IFH defines exclamation as a speech act with a unique illocutionary force and uses an independent-speech-act characterization to capture the relation among exclamatory forms and expressive meaning.

cmsl2pc4q01xfg1maf5dvx7yk
type: InformationNode
text: Although some accounts are skeptical that exclamatives have a dedicated sentential force, almost all existing approaches endorse the illocutionary force hypothesis that exclamation is a speech act.

cmsl2pc4y01xhg1mai4dz8om8
type: InformationNode
text: The distinction between sentential force and illocutionary force shows that a sentence's conventional form-associated force need not equal the force inferred from speaker intention.

cmsl2pc5601xjg1ma3hnxz4y3
type: InformationNode
text: Exclamatory use spans varied forms, including interjections, declaratives, interrogatives, and wh-exclamatives; declaratives and interrogatives can be used with an intention paralleling that of wh-exclamatives.

cmsl2pz5z01zag1maiwkngqqt
type: InformationNode
text: The relevant alternative to a dedicated exclamatory force is emotive assertion: an assertion of emotion toward a proposition believed true, with intensity presupposed.

cmsl2qjo2020wg1mav3vq9jao
type: InformationNode
text: On this alternative, wh-exclamatives and declarative exclamations assert the speaker's emotion toward the believed extreme-degree proposition, rather than merely contributing non-at-issue expressive content or factive presupposition.

cmsl2qobg021gg1mazhprwe4i
type: RA
type: definition to classification
uses scheme: definition_to_classification
name: Argument from Definition to Verbal Classification
applies scheme key: definition_to_classification

Premise
from: I:cmsl2pc2d01x7g1makbmxl27p
to: S:cmsl2qobg021gg1mazhprwe4i

Premise
from: I:cmsl2pc4h01xbg1mamxmy237k
to: S:cmsl2qobg021gg1mazhprwe4i

Premise
from: I:cmsl2pc4j01xdg1maizq2bjfl
to: S:cmsl2qobg021gg1mazhprwe4i

Premise
from: I:cmsl2pc4q01xfg1maf5dvx7yk
to: S:cmsl2qobg021gg1mazhprwe4i

Premise
from: I:cmsl2pc4y01xhg1mai4dz8om8
to: S:cmsl2qobg021gg1mazhprwe4i

Premise
from: I:cmsl2pc5601xjg1ma3hnxz4y3
to: S:cmsl2qobg021gg1mazhprwe4i

Premise
from: I:cmsl2pz5z01zag1maiwkngqqt
to: S:cmsl2qobg021gg1mazhprwe4i

Conclusion
from: S:cmsl2qobg021gg1mazhprwe4i
to: I:cmsl2qjo2020wg1mav3vq9jao

count: 0
weight: 1
contribution: 0

count: 0
weight: 0.5
contribution: 0

count: 0
weight: -0.7
contribution: 0

count: 0
weight: -1
contribution: 0

count: 0
weight: 0.25
contribution: 0