PTA cheat sheet

reference · current · NLP and argumentation · edited 2026-11-05

PTA: form and substance

form	schema	shared	substance
α	a is X because a is Y	p1.subj = p2.subj	subjects are… Fact Value Policy
β	a is X because b is X	p1.subj != p2.subj p1.pred == p2.pred	subjects are … singular particular universal
γ	a is X because b is Y	p1.subj != p2.subj p1.pred != p2.pred	in $𝑠 𝑅 𝑝$ , $𝑅_{1}$ and $𝑅_{2}$ are… identical different – try a middle step “a is Y”
δ	q is <A or U> because q is Z	subj = q pred = A or U	Z is reported by… I - the speaker II - the hearer III - a third party

Flow chart

flowchart TB
  c(["rewrite: conclusion because premise"]) --> d{"premise about the<br/>whole conclusion q?"}
  d -- yes --> D["δ · person of Z:<br/>I · II · III"]
  d -- no --> s{"same subject?"}
  s -- yes --> p1{"same predicate?"}
  s -- no --> p2{"same predicate?"}
  p1 -- no --> A["α · predicate types:<br/>F · V · P"]
  p1 -- yes --> X["rephrase / begs<br/>the question"]
  p2 -- yes --> B["β · subject quantities:<br/>s · p · u"]
  p2 -- no --> G{"γ · a→b same<br/>relation as X→Y?"}
  G -- yes --> Gi["γ i"]
  G -- no --> m{"middle step<br/>a is Y works?"}
  m -- yes --> Gm["split: α + β"]
  m -- no --> Gd["γ d · Non"]
  classDef alpha fill:#dbeafe,stroke:#1d4ed8
  classDef beta fill:#dcfce7,stroke:#15803d
  classDef gamma fill:#f3e8ff,stroke:#7e22ce
  classDef delta fill:#ffedd5,stroke:#c2410c
  classDef bot fill:#e5e7eb,stroke:#4b5563
  class A alpha
  class B beta
  class G,Gi,Gm,Gd gamma
  class D delta
  class X bot

Labels

form	substance	lever	name	symbol
α	FF	Y is a SIGN of X	argument from sign	Sig
α	FF	Y is a CAUSE of X	argument from cause	Cau
α	FF	Y is an EFFECT of X	argument from effect	Ef
α	FF	Y is CORRELATED with X	argument from correlation	Cor
α	FF	Y is a MOTIVE for X	argument from motive	Mot
α	FF	Y EXCLUDES X	argument from incompatibility	Inc
α	VF	Y is a CRITERION for X	argument from criterion	Cr
α	VF	Y is the DEFINITION of X	argument from definition	Def
α	VF	Y can be SUBSUMED under X	argument from subsumption	Su
α	VV	Y is a NORM for X	argument from norm	Nor
α	VV	Y is an INSTANTIATION of X	argument from instantiation	Ins
α	VV	Y is a DISQUALIFIER of X	argument from disqualifier	Dis
α	PF	Y is a PRAGMATIC MOTIVATION for X	pragmatic argument	Pra
α	PF	Y is a PRIOR INVESTMENT in X	argument from waste	W
α	PF	Y is the FEASIBILITY of X	argument from possibility	Pos
α	PV	Y is a PRINCIPLED MOTIVATION for X	argument from principle	Pri
α	PV	Y is an EVALUATIVE MOTIVATION for X	argument from evaluation	Ev
α	PP	Y is a DEONTIC MOTIVATION for X	deontic argument	Deo
α	PP	Y is a TELEOLOGIC MOTIVATION for X	teleologic argument	Tel
β	ss, pp, uu	a is ANALOGOUS to b	argument from analogy	A
β	ss, pp, uu	a is SIMILAR to b	argument from similarity	Sim
β	ss, pp, uu	a is COMPARABLE to b	argument from comparison	Cpa
β	ss, pp, uu	a is EQUAL to b	argument from equality	Eq
β	ss, pp, uu	a is described METAPHORICALLY as b	metaphoric argument	Me
β	ss, pp, uu	a is COMPOSED of b	argument from composition	Cpo
β	ss, pp, uu	a is a PART of b	argument from division	Div
β	ss, pp, uu	a RANKS BELOW b	argumentum a maiore	Ma
β	ss, pp, uu	a RANKS ABOVE b	argumentum a minore	Mi
β	ss, pp, uu	a OWES RECIPROCITY to b	argument from reciprocity	R
β	ps, us, up	b is an EXAMPLE of a	argument from example	Exa
β	ps, us, up	b is a SPECIES of a	argument from species	Sp
β	sp, su, pu	a belongs to the TOTALITY of b	argument from totality	To
β	sp, su, pu	a belongs to the GENUS of b	argument from genus	G
γ	i	b is SYNONYMOUS to a and Y is SYNONYMOUS to X	argument from synonyms	Sy
γ	i	b is the OPPOSITE of a and Y is the OPPOSITE of X	argument from opposites	Op
γ	i	b is DERIVATIVE of a and Y is DERIVATIVE of X	argument from derivatives	Der
γ	i	b is INTEGRATIVE of a and Y is INTEGRATIVE of X	argument from integratives	Int
γ	i	b is the CONVERSE of a and Y is the CONVERSE of X	argument from converses	Cve
γ	d	—	non sequitur	Non
δ	I	Z is ETHOTICALLY AUTHORITATIVE for A	ethotic argument	Eth
δ	II	Z is CHARACTERALLY AUTHORITATIVE for U	argumentum ad hominem	H
δ	II	Z is a NEGATIVE MOTIVATION for A	argumentum ad baculum	B
δ	II	Z is an OFFERED REWARD for A	argumentum ad carotam	Car
δ	II	Z COMMITS the addressee to A	argument from concession	Cce
δ	II	Z is an UNDESIRABLE IMPLICATION supporting U	argumentum ad consequentiam	Cse
δ	III	Z is EPISTEMICALLY AUTHORITATIVE for A	argument from expert opinion	Exp
δ	III	Z is MORALLY AUTHORITATIVE for A	argument from moral authority	Mor
δ	III	Z is TESTIMONIALLY AUTHORITATIVE for A	argument from testimony	Tes
δ	III	Z is POPULARLY AUTHORITATIVE for A	argumentum ad populum	Pop
δ	III	Z is a PRESUMPTION in favor of A	argumentum ad ignorantiam	Ig

Connector fields. The canonical form goes in four fields, matching the template letters; note is for remarks. transformations lists each wording change once, with its statement, in any order.

conclusion subject    Socrates           a  (δ: q)
conclusion predicate  is mortal          X  (δ: [is acceptable] / [is unacceptable])
premise subject       all men            b  (α: a again; δ: q)
premise predicate     are mortal         Y  (β: X again; δ: Z)
transformations       —

What links here: NPC stances: data model