Litotes (pronounced lahy-tuh-teez, lit-uh-teez or lahy-toh-teez)
In formal rhetoric, a figure of speech whereby something
is stated by denying its opposite, especially (though not of necessity) one in
which an affirmative is expressed by the negative of its contrary (a certain
class of understatement).
1650–1660: A learned borrowing from the Late Latin lītotēs, from the Ancient Greek λιτότης
(litótēs) (literally “plainness” and
used in the sense also of “simplicity, understatement”), from λιτός (litós) (smooth, plain, simple). In the rules and conventions of classical rhetoric,
litotes was known also as moderatour or antenantiosis;
it was a device to achieve a ironic effect, emphasizing a point by stating a
negative further to affirm a positive, often by the
use of a double negatives. Litotes is a
noun, litotical is an adjective and litotically is an adverb; the noun plural
is litotes.
Meiosis (pronounced mahy-oh-sis)
(1) In cell biology, part of the process of gamete
formation, consisting of chromosome conjugation and two cell divisions, in the
course of which the diploid chromosome number becomes reduced to the haploid
(2) In formal rhetoric, belittlement or notably expressive
understatement.
1580–1590: From the Ancient Greek meíōsis (a lessening), the construct being meiō-, (a variant stem of meioûn
(to lessen) from meíōn (less)) + -sis. The –sis suffix was from the Ancient Greek
-σις (-sis) and was used to forms
noun of action), often via Latin but increasingly also from French; it had
exactly the same effect as the Latin –entia
and the English -ing. Historically, the
use in terms borrowed from Ancient Greek was comparatively rare but there are
many modern coinages based on Ancient Greek roots, reflecting to ongoing
reverence for the ancient languages. Meiosis is a noun, meiotic is an adjective and
meiotically is an adverb.
Paradiastole (pronounced par-uh-die-ast-oh-lee
In formal rhetoric, a form of
euphemism in which a positive synonym is substituted for a negative word.
Circa 1640: From the Ancient Greek
παραδιαστολή (paradiastolḗ), the construct being παρα- (para-) (next to, alongside) + διαστολή (diastolḗ) (separation, distinction). Paradiastole is a noun, paradiastolic is an
adjective and paradiastolically is an adverb; the noun plural is paradiastoles.
The use of understatement is
cross-cultural and is identifiable in many languages and the English upper
classes made it something of a tradition; it was never unexpected to hear some
grandee refer to his forty-room country house as “the cottage” but for sheer
scale, few can match Emperor Hirohito (1901-1989; Emperor (昭和天皇 (Shōwa-tennō) of Japan 1926-1989).
Having endured hearing a long succession of bad news about the state of
Japanese military affairs, he learned of the defeat of his axis partner, Nazi
Germany and then, the dropping of atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Unlike some of the generals, admirals and
politicians advising him, the emperor accepted the inevitable and on 14 August
1945, delivered a speech effectively accepting the terms of the Potsdam
Declaration (26 July 1945), the Allies' demand of unconditional surrender. It had taken two A-Bombs to summon the most
memorable understatement of World War II (1939-1945): “…the war situation has developed not necessarily to
Japan's advantage...” So, if
the word “understatement” is well understood and widely practiced, why the need
for “litotes”, “meiosis” & “paradiastole”, all figures of speech which are
a form of understatement. For what most
people do, most of the time, there’s really no need at all and “understatement”
is better because its meaning isn’t obscure, unlike the classical trio. However, in the arcane world of literary
theory and textual deconstruction, the words do have some utility to convey
subtle or nuanced meanings.
A litotes is a form of
understatement in which a double negative or a negation is used to affirm
something positive, usually with some implication of restraint in the
expression, a familiar example being “he’s not the most intelligent person I
know” which people understand as “he’s a bit dim” without brutal edge and in
that it’s also an applied euphemism. It
can also be used to create ambiguities in meaning, illustrated in the BBC TV
comedy series Yes Minister
(1980-1984) when the minister discovers his performance in office is in many
places being described as “not bad” and he’s troubled because the mere phrase does
not convey the meaning. Without the
context in which the words were uttered and the various non-verbal clues
attached to the delivery, he has no idea whether he’s being regarded “quite good”
or “not quite
good enough”. It does seem “litotes”
is sometimes applied to what are, strictly speaking, an example of “meiosis”,
usually in instances where what’s being described is apparently “weak or
understated” but having the effect of intensification.
The nuance attached to a meiosis was
it was a type of understatement downplaying the significance of something,
often with the hope of creating the impression things are not as bad as they
seem. Done well, it can work: When Harold Macmillan (1894–1986; UK
prime-minister 1957-1963) casually alluded to a few “local difficulties” (the crisis engendered
by the resignation of his entire team of Treasury ministers) before flying off
for a tour of the Commonwealth, his words did the trick and the ructions almost
immediately subsided. Unlike litotes, the
meiosis is not so associated with double negatives but is characterized by “minimizing
language”. In politics, the paradiastole
is perhaps the highest form of the understatement because it’s of such utility
in the deployment of that standard tool of the politician: the lie.
The paradiastole is a rhetorical
device used to reframe something negative or morally questionable as something positive
or at least neutral and there’s some connection with the mechanics of “Newspeak”
described by George Orwell (1903-1950) in Nineteen Eighty-Four (1949) while in
structural linguistics it’s defined as the “rhetorical
technique of evaluative redescription”.
While most of us relate to that as “euphemism”, the paradiastole differs
in that instead of being a “polite” way of referring to something, it’s used in
an attempt to shift the perception of meaning.
Some paradiastoles are themselves ironic such as the use in IT to
describe bugs in software as “undocumented features” but often it’s an attempt
to deceive or manipulate by seeking to recast something unpleasant as
favorable.
No comments:
Post a Comment