rrence of a looping reduction is relative to which set of reduction procedures we accept. A wrong reduction process does not have to generate any feature of paradoxicality, such as a non-terminating reduction process. Since TCPE has no constraint on illegitimate reduction procedures, it needs to be revised in order not to overgenerate the scope of genuine paradoxes. 3.2 The Later Version of Tennant's Criterion for Paradoxicality Tennant (2016, 2017) proposes an additional condition to solve the problem of overgeneration: all elimination rules must be stated in the generalized form. We will see Tennant's solution to the overgeneration raised by Ekman's paradox and his later criterion for paradoxicality (TCPL) in Section 3.2.1. Section 3.2.2 claims that the choice of generalized elimination rules offers no remedy to the overgeneration problem. The claim is already suggested by Schroeder-Heister and Tranchini (2018). However, they did not distinguish between Tennant's examination of Ekman's paradox and von Plato's. Their proposed Ekman-type reduction, which we will call 'GEkmang reduction,' cannot apply to 95 Tennant's derivation. Therefore, Section 3.2.2 reinforces the claim that the mere adoption of generalized elimination rules is not a solution to the problem of overgeneration. 3.2.1 Tennant's Solution to the Overgeneration As noted in Section 3.1, Ekman's paradox can be a counterexample to TCPE since it raises the overgeneration problem. Although the phenomenon of Ekman's paradox shows that an incorrect reduction procedure produces a non-terminating reduction sequence, TCPE does not explicitly restrict the application of a wrong reduction process. In order to solve the problem, Tennant (2016, 2017) supplements the condition to TCPE that all elimination rules must be formulated in the generalized form. Tennant (2016, 2017) seems to borrow von Plato's solution to Ekman's paradox. Von Plato (2000) notes that the problem of normal form from Ekman's paradox is the choice of standard elimination rules in a natural de