Periphrasis

Periphrasis (pronounced puh-rif-ruh-sis)

(1) A roundabout way of expressing something; a kind of circumlocution (and often needlessly but deliberately long).

(2) An expression phrased in such fashion.

(3) In structural linguistics, expressing a grammatical meaning (such as a tense) using a syntactic construction rather than morphological marking.

(4) In rhetoric, (1) the substitution of a descriptive word or phrase for a proper name (technically a type of circumlocution) or (2) the use of a proper name as a shorthand to stand for qualities associated with it.

1525–1535: A borrowing in the sense of “a roundabout way of speaking; an instance of this” from the Latin periphrasis (circumlocution), from the Ancient Greek περίφρασις (periphrazein) (speak in a roundabout), the construct being peri- (from the Ancient Greek περί (perí) (about, around) + φράζειν (phrázein) (to declare; to express), the present active infinitive of φράζω (phrázō).The adjective periphrastic (having the character of or characterized by periphrasis) came into use in the mid eighteenth century and was from the French périphrastique or directly from the Ancient Greek periphrastikos, from periphrazein (to speak in a roundabout way).  The adjective periphrastical dates from the 1630s and the adverb periphrastically from several decades later.  The expression of disapproval “beating around the bush” applies more to circumlocution than the classic periphrasis which hints at why in linguistics “periphrasis” and “circumlocution” shouldn’t be treated as synonyms despite this being common.  The most helpful distinction between the two is that periphrasis generally is used of those cases where the figure is used with effect, while circumlocution refers to mere wordiness, sometimes to the point of obscuring meaning, thus the overlap with euphemism.  A classic periphrasis is the naming of a thing indirectly by means of some well-known attribute, or characteristic, or attendant circumstance.  A periphrastic conjugation is a conjugation formed by the use of the simple verb with one or more auxiliaries.  Periphrasis & periphrase are nouns, periphrastically is an adverb and periphrasic, periphrastical & periphrastic are adjectives; the noun plural is periphrases.

Periphrasis does have a long tradition in rhetorical as a device where a phrase is used to express a concept which could be conveyed by a single word, or where a longer expression replaces a shorter one, thus the association with descriptive or explanatory words and as well as euphemisms, there’s inevitably some overlap also with the cliché; a periphrasis can straddle the definitions and structural linguistics has a term for everything so someone particularly periphrastical might create periphrases which are also both a pleonasm and a tautology.  Constructions like “the king of the jungle” (lion), “the silver screen” (movies), “the eternal city” (Rome) or “the red planet” (Mars) are all periphrases but are also clichés.  At the margins it can be difficult but “they passed away” (they died) is probably just a clichéd euphemism.  To say of Lindsay Lohan she was “a former child star who suffered a turbulent youth” is a periphrasis whereas to mention she was prone also at times to seem “tired and emotional” is a euphemism for “too much drink”.

Lindsay Lohan and her lawyer in court, Los Angeles, December 2011.

During one of the sessions at the League of Nations held in 1933 before Japan withdrew from the League in response to a report commissioned by the organization which labeled Japan as the unprovoked aggressor in what Tokyo referred to as “The Chinese Attack” or “The Mukden Incident”, one member of the Japanese delegation, when asked why his government’s communiqués contained so many periphrases, responded that they were little more frequent that those in documents issued by other countries but that the unique characteristics of the Japanese language made them appear more obvious.  He may have had a point and there was an understated charm to phrases like “The Manchurian Incident” (Japan’s invasion of China) and “The Emperor Disrespect Incident” (a thwarted 1932 plot by a Korean nationalist to assassinate the Emperor Shōwa (Hirohita, 1901–1989, emperor of Japan 1926-1989).

Henry Fowler (1858–1933) in his A Dictionary of Modern English Usage (1926) saw little use for the periphrasis, dismissing it as the “putting of things in a round-about way”, noting the easiest way of identifying the linguistic sin was the use of abstract nouns such as “basis, case, character, connexion, dearth, description, duration, framework, lack, nature, reference, regard & respect”.  Fowler also pondered cause and effect, his theory being that because abstract thought was a “…mark of civilized man”, the use of the abstract noun was a way of advertising one’s refinement, thus the proliferation he noted in the appearances of periphrases.  He cited “the year’s penultimate month” as a silly alternative to “November” although one could imagine a paragraph in which “November” has unavoidably appeared to often to be elegant that an alternative might be a handy addition.  Generally though, as usual, Henry Fowler is right.

Pleonasm & Tautology

Pleonasm (pronounced plee-uh-naz-uhm)

(1) In rhetoric, the use of more words than are necessary to express an idea; a redundancy in wording.

(2) An instance of this, as free gift or true fact.

(3) Any redundant word or expression.

(4) In a variety of disciplines, an excess in the number or size of parts (now rare except in pathology).

1580–1590: A learned borrowing from the French pléonasme, from the Late Latin pleonasmus, from the Ancient Greek πλεονασμός (pleonasmós) (redundancy, surplus), from πλεονάζω (pleonázō) (to be superfluous), from pleonázein (to be or have more than enough (in grammatical use "superfluously to add”)), a combining form of πλείων (pleíōn) (more), from the primitive Indo-European root pele- (to fill).  The adjective pleonastic (characterized by pleonasm, redundant in language, using more words than are necessary to express an idea) dates from 1778 although sources list the related pleonastical as being in use since the 1650s.  Pleonasm is a noun, pleonastic and pleonasmic are adjectives and pleonastically & pleonasmically are adverbs; the noun plural is pleonasms.  Despite the modern practice, verb forms seem never to have evolved.

Tautology (pronounced taw-tol-uh-jee)

(1) The needless repetition of an idea, especially in words other than those of the immediate context, without imparting additional force or clarity of meaning.

(2) In formal logic, as a logical tautology, something true under any possible case or interpretation; it differs from the linguistic form in that in propositional logic it’s a compound propositional form in which all instances simultaneously are true.

(3) In pathology, an excess in the number or size of parts (archaic).

(4) In engineering, the addition of a strengthening device to a design in which all calculations prove it unnecessary.  By convention tautology is applied to small-scale instances whereas a redundancy tends to be larger, extending even to duplicated systems.

1570–1580: From the Late Latin tautologia (representation of the same thing in other words), from the Ancient Greek ταὐτολογία (tautología from tautologos) (a repetition of something already said (the word originally from rhetoric)), the construct being ταὐτός (tautós) (the same) + λόγος (lógos) (saying; explanation), related to legein (to say), from the primitive Indo-European root leg- (to collect, gather).  The modern version is tauto- +‎ -logy.  The origin in English of the -logy suffix lies with loanwords from the Ancient Greek, usually via Latin and French, where the suffix (-λογία) is an integral part of the word loaned (eg astrology from astrologia) since the sixteenth century.  French picked up -logie from the Latin -logia, from the Ancient Greek -λογία (-logía).  Within Greek, the suffix is an -ία (-ía) abstract from λόγος (lógos) (account, explanation, narrative), and that a verbal noun from λέγω (légō) (I say, speak, converse, tell a story).  In English the suffix became extraordinarily productive, used notably to form names of sciences or disciplines of study, analogous to the names traditionally borrowed from the Latin (eg astrology from astrologia; geology from geologia) and by the late eighteenth century, the practice (despite the disapproval of the pedants) extended to terms with no connection to Greek or Latin such as those building on French or German bases (eg insectology (1766) after the French insectologie; terminology (1801) after the German Terminologie).  Within a few decades of the intrusion of modern languages, combinations emerged using English terms (eg undergroundology (1820); hatology (1837)).  In this evolution, the development may be though similar to the latter-day proliferation of “-isms” (fascism; feminism et al).  Tautology, tautologism & tautologist are nouns, tautologize is a verb, tautologically & tautologously are adverbs and tautological, tautologic & tautologous are adjectives; the noun plural is tautologies.

A tautology is the unnecessary repetition (often in close proximity) of an idea, statement, or word in circumstances in which the meaning has already been expressed.  In the expression 4 am in the morning”, the tautology is created by morning because am (an abbreviation of the Latin ante meridiem (before noon) has already established an unambiguous meaning.  For technical reasons however the odd tautology may be required, 4 am in the morning once used for the lyrics of a pop song because, were either of the tautological elements to be removed, the rhythm of the tune would be lost.  In the same manner a poet might be moved (poets are often moved) to write of the dawn’s sunrise and that’s one word too many but the tautology might be justified if it adds to the lyrical quality (something not guaranteed in poetry).  Tautologies seem sometimes to be used to add emphasis or strengthen a meaning and thus function adjectivally.  To say completely and totally beyond my comprehension and understanding technically loses nothing if either of the two tautological pairs are pared down but the practice is common as a rhetorical device and probably often effective as long as the wordiness is restricted to the odd flourish and doesn’t infect the rest of the speech.  A device of oral use therefore but usually an absurdity in writing.

Tautologies abound but those who condemn need to consider the context and history.  The phrase PIN number has long been ubiquitous and sounds right but seems wrong once deconstructed: undo the acronym and it becomes personal identification number number; what has happened is either PIN has become a word or PIN number an encapsulated phrase.  Democratic English resolves the argument in the usual manner: pedants can have their PINs while the rest of us use pin numbers.  In commerce, tautologies are often part of what the law describes as “mere puffery”.  A phrase like absolutely unique and a one-off, something of a favorite of antique dealers, is not only a tautology but not infrequently also an untruth but in the business such things are understood.  Forgivable then in a way that the linguistic sin very unique is not often tolerated by the fastidious although strangely, quite unique seems to be, presumably because it’s a more elegant construction.

Pleonasm refers to overabundance, and is mow rarely used outside of the medical context in which it describes aspects of tissue growth.  A linguistic pleonasm is usually identified as a phrase with more words than necessary, often by being repetitive or having empty or clichéd words, but is not necessarily wrong or confusing.  At the margins the difference between tautology and pleonasm does get ragged and not all dictionaries and style guides agree.  The Oxford English Dictionary (OED) indicates the difference seems to be between redundancy of expression and repetition and as a general principle that’s probably helpful, if not exhaustive.  One suggestion of a method to define a tautology is to substitute an antonym for one of the allegedly offending elements.  That works well if it creates contradictions in terms like 4 pm in the morning or the dawn’s sunset but doesn’t resolve everything.  A pleasurable delight seems a pleonasm because it uses unnecessary words to make the point and, under the test, a tautology because there are presumably no un-pleasurable delights although even then there are nuances because the rare delicacy most would enjoy as a delight might to someone with a specific allergy be not at all enjoyable.

Actually, biological reactions aside, something most would not find a delight can to others be entirely that.  In Freudian psychoanalysis, Lustprinzip (the pleasure principle) describes the driving force of the id: the human instinct to seek pleasure and avoid pain.  However, the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders notes the existence of masochism in various forms which involve pleasure being gained from pain.  Thus the connotations of words are a subjective and not objective test for there are those for whom pleasurable pain needs to be distinguished from un-pleasurable pain, the latter a mere tautology to most.  Sexual masochism disorder (SMD) had an interesting history in the DSM.  It wasn’t in the first edition (DSM-1, 1952) but in the second edition (DSM-II 1968) the only mention of masochism was in the categorization of sexual deviations, then defined as applying to those individuals for who sexual interest was directed primarily towards objects other than people of the opposite sex, toward sexual acts not usually associated with coitus, or toward coitus performed under bizarre circumstances as in necrophilia, pedophilia, sexual sadism, and fetishism.  It was noted that while many patients found their practices distasteful, they were unable to substitute normal sexual behavior and the diagnostic criteria was also exclusionary, noting the diagnosis was not appropriate for individuals who perform deviant sexual acts because normal sexual objects are not available to them.  This changed little in the third & fourth editions issued between 1980-2000 which refined the technical description and diagnostic criteria.  In the fifth editions (2013-2022), while classified as one of the paraphilias (algolagnic disorders) and thus "anomalous activity preferences", clinicians were advised a formal diagnosis of SMD was appropriate only if individual experiences clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning.  By 2013 the DSM seemed to be back where Freud had started.

A mammary pleonasm (or tautology depending on one's view): Jasmine Tridevil during addition and the final result.

Pleonasm should not be confused with pleomastia (now largely supplanted by polymastia in clinical use) which is the condition of having more than two mammary glands (breasts) or nipples.  It’s a rare condition which doesn’t present in the geometrically perfect example presented in 2014 by Jasmine Tridevil, the stage name of Florida massage therapist Alisha Jasmine Hessler (b 1993).  Ms Tridevil initially claimed to have had the central unit implanted by a plastic surgeon but later admitted it was a construction made substantially of latex and silicone, attached to her with surgical glue, helpfully providing photographs of the maintenance being undertaken.  However, encouraged by enjoying more than fifteen minutes of fame, in 2019 Ms Tridevil sought to crowdfund the money (apparently US$50-000) needed actually to have the surgery performed.  Progress on this project hasn’t been reported but Ms Tridevil has maintained her presence on a number of internet platforms including vlogs on topics as varied as "How to dominate your boyfriend" and “My gothic Christmas tree”.

The offence caused by unnecessary words is such that not only do tautology and pleonasm exist but for serious critics there’s also auxesis (from the Ancient Greek: αὔξησις (aúxēsis) (growth; increase (which in rhetoric references various forms of increase)) and describes exaggerated language, battology (from the Ancient Greek βαττολογία (battología) (stammering speech)) which is the repeated reiteration of the same words, phrases, or ideas and perissology (from the Latin perissologia) which is the use of more words than are necessary to convey meaning.  At the margins, there’s often a bit of overlap so care need to be taken that one’s critique of a redundant (and all the constructions are really forks of that) word or phrase doesn’t itself commit the same offence.  Grammar Nazis of course delight in faulting others when they use a tautology, some particularly pedantic even correcting other obsessives who might wrongly have tagged a tautology when really they should have perceived a pleonasm.