The broader prompt in (18A) can be matched by many narratives, including narratives in (19), so an exclamative's apparent suitability there does not show that it answers a question.

Evidence (3)

Exclamatives, deniability, and answerhood — Semantic non-equivalence of exclamatives and emotive-predicate assertions

The narratives work as replies, but it seems questionable to call them ‘ answers ’ .

https://doi.org/10.1515/tl-2025-2006#unit-4-p3

Exclamatives, deniability, and answerhood — Semantic non-equivalence of exclamatives and emotive-predicate assertions

The narratives work as replies, but it seems questionable to call them ‘ answers ’ .

https://doi.org/10.1515/tl-2025-2006#unit-4-p3

Exclamatives, deniability, and answerhood — Semantic non-equivalence of exclamatives and emotive-predicate assertions

The narratives work as replies, but it seems questionable to call them ‘ answers ’ .

https://doi.org/10.1515/tl-2025-2006#unit-4-p3

Respond to this claim on Isonomia

Build or challenge arguments with structured reasoning in the Digital Agora.

Join & respond

Embed this claim

<iframe
  src="https://www.isonomia.app/embed/claim/c1cb3f23604d567077e7177f26a006a85f2c2a736e6f07572446d22a6609d63d"
  width="600"
  height="280"
  frameborder="0"
  style="border: 1px solid #e5e7eb; border-radius: 8px;"
  title="Isonomia Claim"
  loading="lazy"
></iframe>

Copy and paste into any website or forum that supports HTML.