Against the "Ordinary Summing" Test for Convergence

One popular test for distinguishing linked and convergent argument structures is Robert Yanal's Ordinary Summing Test. Douglas Walton, in his comprehensive survey of possible candidates for the linked/ convergent distinction, advocates a particular version ofYanal's test. In a recent article, Alexander Tyaglo proposes to generalize and verifY Y anal's algorithm for convergent arguments, the basis for Y an~' s Ordinary Summing Test. In this paper I will argue that Y anal's ordinary summing equation does not demarcate convergence and so his Ordinary Summing Test fails. Hence, despite Walton's recommendation or Tyaglo 's generalization, the Ordinary Summing Test should not be used for distinguishing linked argument structures from convergent argument structures. Resume: L 'Epreuve "Ordinary Summing" de Robert Y anal est une fayon courante de distinguer des premisses dependantes des premisses independantes. Dans son expose detaille des differentes discussions sur Ia distinction entre ces premisses, Douglas Walton plaide en faveur d'une version de l'epreuve de Yanal. Dans un article recent, Alexander Tyaglo propose de generaliser et de verifier Ia methode algorithmique deY anal, qui est a Ia base de son epreuve "Ordinary Summing". Dans cet article j 'a vance que sa methode ne distingue pas les premisses dependantes des premisses independantes, et done son epreuve echoue. Par consequent, malgre Ia recommendation de Walton ou Ia generalisation de Tyaglo, on ne devrait pas employer I' epreuve "Ordinary Summing" pour differencier ces premisses.