LimitedNegatives?

[steve]

Paidion,

Thanks for that list! I think a few of them might not be intended as limited negatives, but you came up with a lot more than I had!

[Suzana]

... For those unfamiliar with this, a limited negative would be an expression that is constructed like this: "not A, but B", which, in fact, means this: "not ONLY A, but ALSO B."...

Steve, I know I've heard you talk about these, but I can't recall what you said about the origin of the expression. That is, is it an explanation deduced and arrived at through necessity, to understand seeming contradictions; or is it a known and recognisable Hebrew or Greek form of expression (& found elsewhere in literature)?
Thanks,

[TK]

i thought Steve said it was form of rhetoric used at the time.. but i am not 100% sure about this.

TK

[darinhouston]

i thought Steve said it was form of rhetoric used at the time.. but i am not 100% sure about this.

TK

I also remember that, but can't find any reference through Google or otherwise to such a literary device. Does anyone have a reference to a source of information on this form of speech? Maybe it's called something slightly different?

[Homer]

Perhaps the term should actually be "limited negation". See here:

http://www.semioticon.com/seo/N/negation.html

Note: There is a "long" version of the article you can click on.

Here is a comment from the conclusion:

It seems simple to 'just say no', but negation is in fact astonishingly complicated. In logic the role of negation is so complex as to have defied complete understanding despite over two thousand years of concerted effort.

[Suzana]

Thanks guys,

I might do some more research when I have time later, there seems to be interesting possibilities in Wiki under 'contradictions' (I like words and language subjects).
Homer's article was quite interesting, (even without specifically mentioning the limited bit); here's some trivia:

"Indeed, the failure rate in college introductory logic classes suggests that truth-functional negation is extremely difficult for most human beings to grasp."

and throw in their view of politics for good measure:

"Human beings with symbolic representation are able to talk about the dark side of the planet Mercury, Santa Claus's older sister, or integrity in politics, despite the impossibility of ever having direct sensory acquaintance with these non-existent entities."

[darinhouston]

Thanks guys,
I might do some more research when I have time later, there seems to be interesting possibilities in Wiki under 'contradictions' (I like words and language subjects).

I can't wait to read Homer's article -- have you seen the little book called "Eats Shoots and Leaves?" (or is it Eats, Shoots, and Leaves?)

[steve]

On the question of the origin of the expression "limited negative," I did not make it up, even though Google searches do not produce anything on it. I heard one or two Christian teachers use the expression in the seventies, though I don't remember the identities of those from whom I heard it. I had heard that it was a kind of Hebraism. Whether the teachers were guessing or if they had scholarly sources, I may never know. In any case, the phenomenon is observable and obvious, even if it has no official name (or even if it has a different name). If no other source for it turns up, maybe I should claim it as my own! It would no longer be a Hebraism, but a Greggism.

[darinhouston]

On the question of the origin of the expression "limited negative," I did not make it up, even though Google searches do not produce anything on it. I heard one or two Christian teachers use the expression in the seventies, though I don't remember the identities of those from whom I heard it. I had heard that it was a Hebraism. Whether the teachers were guessing or if they had scholarly sources, I may never know. In ay case, the phenomenon is obvious, even if it has no official name (or even if it has a different name). If no other source for it turns up, maybe I should claim it as my own! It would no longer be a Hebraism, but a Greggism.

A Greggism -- I like it -- I'm still interested in finding linguistic support for the phenomenon, though since our frequent critics may not be prepared to accept a Greggism. I do agree it's an obvious possibility (to an honest man) once someone raises it as a possibility -- I'm not sure it's obvious without hindsight, though, as it does seem to easily resolve things commonly seen as contradictory.

[TK]

Speaking of Greggisms, (and i am getting somewhat off track now)- my wife and i have a habit of finding what we have called "sayisms" when we watch movies like "The Ten Commandments"- you know-- little slices of cheesy dialogue whose sole purpose is for dramactic effect. examples:

"The day you break that oath will be the last your eyes shall ever see."
"Love cannot drown truth, Nefretiri"
"No, you are not my son. If you believe that men and women are cattle to be driven under the lash, if you can bow before idols of stone and golden images of beasts, you are not my son."
"In the copper mines of Sinai, the living are dead."
"Is life in bondage better than death?"
" Beauty is but a curse to our women."
"There are no strangers among those who seek God's forgiveness."
"I am a stone cutter. The pharoah likes his images cut deep."
" Let him rave on, that men will know him mad."

and of course, "so let it be written, so let it be done."

sorry for the sidetrack.

TK