On Mon, 11 Jul 2005 23:33:07 GMT, Bob Cunningham
<exw6sxq@earthlink.net> wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Jul 2005 17:13:12 +0100, Chris Croughton
> <chris@keristor.net> said:
>
>> On Mon, 11 Jul 2005 14:12:57 GMT, Miss Elaine Eos
>> <Misc@*your-shoes*PlayNaked.com> wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>> > [about things like "not unfriendly" to
>> > mean "sorta friendly"]
>
>> > At any rate, does anyone know where this
>> > form originated, and whether or not it is
>> > considered proper?
>
>> It is considered to be not improper <g>.
>
> It even has a name, "litotes". See
> http://humanities.byu.edu/rhetoric/silva.htm .
Hmm, that site defines 'litotes' as "Deliberate understatement,
especially when expressing a thought by denying its opposite."
I don't consider all uses of the double negative to be an
understatement, in some cases (as in my examples) they are an accurate
statement:
I am not unhappy with the result =>
I am not happy, but I am not unhappy (miserable) either.
Similarly with the "not unfriendly" example, the attitude expressed is
"not friendly, but not the opposite". The general use is to indicate an
intermediate state, as opposed to the extreme. This can be used as a
deliberate understatement, indeed, but need not be.
> The _New Shorter Oxford English Dictionary_ dates "litotes"
> "L16", late 16th century.
I forgot to look it us in the Concise OED and in Fowler last night...
Chris C
|
|