Difference between revisions of "Litotes"

From Witterpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
 
Line 3: Line 3:
 
Litotes is a figure of speech consisting of an understatement in which an affirmative is expressed by negating it's opposite, such as:
 
Litotes is a figure of speech consisting of an understatement in which an affirmative is expressed by negating it's opposite, such as:
  
The food wasn't inedible
+
* "The food wasn't inedible"
  
I didn't say I wouldn't go with you
+
* "I didn't say I wouldn't go with you"
 +
 
 +
* "I am [[nothing if not inconsistent]]"
  
 
A typical use within Wittertainment, from the Goal! review:
 
A typical use within Wittertainment, from the Goal! review:

Latest revision as of 00:07, 29 January 2018

Mark has a tendency to describe films as being "not without flaws", which seems to annoy the English teachers within the Wittertainment audience. It has been pointed out that this phrase is an example of the classical rhetorical device of litotes.

Litotes is a figure of speech consisting of an understatement in which an affirmative is expressed by negating it's opposite, such as:

  • "The food wasn't inedible"
  • "I didn't say I wouldn't go with you"

A typical use within Wittertainment, from the Goal! review:

MARK: I was not unmoved.

SIMON: So you were moved then.

MARK: No! If I had meant that I would have said that!

Whilst it can be used within a film review on the radio / podcast / other media thing, the use of litotes can be a little vague for use in an essay or a book.