Conclusion
Exclamatory use occurs across multiple forms, and conventional form-associated sentential force need not determine the illocutionary force inferred from speaker intention.
View claim pageArgument
Exclamatory use occurs across multiple forms, and conventional form-associated sentential force need not determine the illocutionary force inferred from speaker intention.
⟨ ⟩Classification/Definition
Premises (7)
- Prior speech-act approaches distinguish canonical clause types and represent their distinct illocutionary forces with operators such as ASSERT and ?.Evidence for this premise (3)Exclamation, intensity, and emotive assertion — Framing the dispute: from illocutionary force to emotive assertiondesignated speech act operators such as ‘ ASSERT ’ and ‘ ? ’https://doi.org/10.1515/tl-2024-2022#unit-1-p1Exclamation, intensity, and emotive assertion — Framing the dispute: from illocutionary force to emotive assertiondesignated speech act operators such as ‘ ASSERT ’ and ‘ ? ’https://doi.org/10.1515/tl-2024-2022#unit-1-p1Exclamation, intensity, and emotive assertion — Framing the dispute: from illocutionary force to emotive assertiondesignated speech act operators such as ‘ ASSERT ’ and ‘ ? ’https://doi.org/10.1515/tl-2024-2022#unit-1-p1
- 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.Evidence for this premise (3)Exclamation, intensity, and emotive assertion — Framing the dispute: from illocutionary force to emotive assertionone asserts cooperatively (i.e., without intent to deceive) what one believes or knows through evidence to be true.https://doi.org/10.1515/tl-2024-2022#unit-1-p6Exclamation, intensity, and emotive assertion — Framing the dispute: from illocutionary force to emotive assertionone asserts cooperatively (i.e., without intent to deceive) what one believes or knows through evidence to be true.https://doi.org/10.1515/tl-2024-2022#unit-1-p6Exclamation, intensity, and emotive assertion — Framing the dispute: from illocutionary force to emotive assertionone asserts cooperatively (i.e., without intent to deceive) what one believes or knows through evidence to be true.https://doi.org/10.1515/tl-2024-2022#unit-1-p6
- 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.Evidence for this premise (3)Exclamation, intensity, and emotive assertion — Framing the dispute: from illocutionary force to emotive assertiona speech act with a unique illocutionary forcehttps://doi.org/10.1515/tl-2024-2022#unit-1-p5Exclamation, intensity, and emotive assertion — Framing the dispute: from illocutionary force to emotive assertiona speech act with a unique illocutionary forcehttps://doi.org/10.1515/tl-2024-2022#unit-1-p5Exclamation, intensity, and emotive assertion — Framing the dispute: from illocutionary force to emotive assertiona speech act with a unique illocutionary forcehttps://doi.org/10.1515/tl-2024-2022#unit-1-p5
- 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.Evidence for this premise (3)Exclamation, intensity, and emotive assertion — Framing the dispute: from illocutionary force to emotive assertionthe illocutionary force hypothesis (IFH) that there is something like the exclamation speech act is shared by almost all of the existing approaches.https://doi.org/10.1515/tl-2024-2022#unit-1-p4Exclamation, intensity, and emotive assertion — Framing the dispute: from illocutionary force to emotive assertionthe illocutionary force hypothesis (IFH) that there is something like the exclamation speech act is shared by almost all of the existing approaches.https://doi.org/10.1515/tl-2024-2022#unit-1-p4Exclamation, intensity, and emotive assertion — Framing the dispute: from illocutionary force to emotive assertionthe illocutionary force hypothesis (IFH) that there is something like the exclamation speech act is shared by almost all of the existing approaches.https://doi.org/10.1515/tl-2024-2022#unit-1-p4
- 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.Evidence for this premise (3)Exclamation, intensity, and emotive assertion — Framing the dispute: from illocutionary force to emotive assertionthe illocutionary force in many cases is not equivalent to the sentential force.https://doi.org/10.1515/tl-2024-2022#unit-1-p3Exclamation, intensity, and emotive assertion — Framing the dispute: from illocutionary force to emotive assertionthe illocutionary force in many cases is not equivalent to the sentential force.https://doi.org/10.1515/tl-2024-2022#unit-1-p3Exclamation, intensity, and emotive assertion — Framing the dispute: from illocutionary force to emotive assertionthe illocutionary force in many cases is not equivalent to the sentential force.https://doi.org/10.1515/tl-2024-2022#unit-1-p3
- 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.Evidence for this premise (3)Exclamation, intensity, and emotive assertion — Framing the dispute: from illocutionary force to emotive assertionboth declaratives (2a) and interrogatives (2b) can be used with a speaker ’ s intention that parallels the one in exclamativeshttps://doi.org/10.1515/tl-2024-2022#unit-1-p2Exclamation, intensity, and emotive assertion — Framing the dispute: from illocutionary force to emotive assertionboth declaratives (2a) and interrogatives (2b) can be used with a speaker ’ s intention that parallels the one in exclamativeshttps://doi.org/10.1515/tl-2024-2022#unit-1-p2Exclamation, intensity, and emotive assertion — Framing the dispute: from illocutionary force to emotive assertionboth declaratives (2a) and interrogatives (2b) can be used with a speaker ’ s intention that parallels the one in exclamativeshttps://doi.org/10.1515/tl-2024-2022#unit-1-p2
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/mwL5JLIV" 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.