Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site tekecs.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!tektronix!tekecs!paulson@hplabsc.UUCP
From: paulson@hplabsc.UUCP@tekecs.UUCP (paulson@hplabsc.UUCP)
Newsgroups: net.nlang
Subject: Re: Unmentioned quiz
Message-ID: <161@tekecs.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 3-Oct-83 11:39:59 EDT
Article-I.D.: tekecs.161
Posted: Mon Oct  3 11:39:59 1983
Date-Received: Tue, 4-Oct-83 07:50:31 EDT
Sender: news@tekecs.UUCP
Organization: Tektronix, Wilsonville OR
Lines: 18

I checked out "apophasis", "paraleipsis" and "preterition" in four 
dictionaries:  Websters New International Dictionary (Webster's First),
Webster's Second New International Dictionary (Webster's Second), the
Oxford English Dictionary (OED), and the American Heritage Dictionary of the
English Language.  The American Heritage Dictionary was worthless, as it
didn't include any of the words (what's the use of a dictionary that only
has words you already know?  how dull).  The other three agreed that
"paraleipsis" (also spelled "paralipsis" and "paralepsis") are synonyms,
both meaning the rhetorical device of mentioning something while pretending
not to mention it (e.g. "not to mention his vile debaucheries and flagrant
misuse of taxpayer's money").  The OED and Webster's Second defined "apophasis"
as synonymous with the other two;  Webster's First suggests that while
"paralipsis" and "preterition" are pretending not to mention a NEGATIVE point,
"apophasis" can also refer to pretending not to mention a POSITIVE point
(e.g. "I'll pass over Ms. Samaritan's great services to our community").
Hence, while paralipsis is always apophasis, apophasis may not be paralipsis.

New quiz:  Name five other rhetorical devices.