ABSTRACT
The purpose of argumentation is always to defend a standpoint. Some are part of a “progressive” presentation, in which the standpoint being defended follows the argumentation; others are part of a “retrogressive” presentation, in which the standpoint precedes the argumentation. Speakers or writers who want to make clear that what follows is argumentation do not necessarily need to resort to explicit announcements; they can also use indicators of argumentation. As a rule, indicators of argumentation also serve as indicators of standpoints. Identifying this standpoint is usually the first step towards identifying the argumentation. To view borderline cases when in doubt as argumentation is to follow the strategy of maximally argumentative interpretation. Any problematic utterance that, for instance, might also be just a remark or an explanation is then interpreted as argumentation. An important characteristic of explanation, elaboration, or clarification is that whatever is being explained, elaborated, or clarified is something that is already accepted.
