10

I’m thinking in terms of phrases like:

You may be [one connotation of denotation x] but you’re not [contrasting connotation of denotation x].

Two examples are:

  • He may have been your father, but he wasn't your daddy.

    from Guardians of the Galaxy 2, which contrasts two different words meaning male parent: father meaning a biological parent, and daddy meaning a father figure responsible for upbringing.

  • Just because you’re correct, it doesn’t mean you’re right.

    which contrasts factual correctness with moral rightness.

What I’m wondering is: does this kind of literary device have a name? Something less clunkier than ‘that thing Yondu said in GoTG2’? If not, does anyone have a suggestion how to call it?

Wrzlprmft
  • 4,395
Don McLeod
  • 101
  • 4
    Nice question! "You can check out any time you like, but you can never leave." – Peter Shor Sep 14 '17 at 16:00
  • 2
    Does this not simply fit the bill for "making a (detailed) distinction"? Not trying to be facetious, I just wonder if it's unusual enough to consider it a literary device. – Flater Sep 14 '17 at 16:02
  • Related: Are there other acceptable juxtapositions of polysemes {'making the unmissable unmissable'}. – Edwin Ashworth Sep 14 '17 at 16:04
  • I know it's your right* to do this, but I still think it's wrong.* In some contexts, it would be *punning / wordplay, but in others it would be making a (detailed) distinction, as @Flater points out. Hardly a special "literary device" - just everyday use of English, in all* contexts (written / spoken, formal / colloquial, etc.). – FumbleFingers Sep 14 '17 at 17:03
  • It exploits multiple meanings, so it's almost a pun. Certainly it's use of paradox. It could also be considered irony, as it creates a surface contradiction which dramatizes an implicit truth. It's almost dirimens copulatio, an example of which would be: "Not only are you correct, but you're also wrong". The term "par'hyponoian", which I haven't run into before, might apply. It describes creating an expectation and then deviating from it for dramatic effect. Example from Wikipedia: "Clement Attlee is a sheep in a sheep's clothing." – MetaEd Sep 14 '17 at 17:04
  • Maybe this particular literary device is very well suited for English, as we have more synonyms than many other languages (because of the large number of languages we adapted words from). So there might not be a Greek name for it. – Peter Shor Sep 14 '17 at 21:16
  • Flater comes close. Making use of fine distinctions between synonyms, by using them in juxtaposition for effect in a not-quite-interchangeable context. Unlikely to have a name as Peter Shor points out. – Edwin Ashworth Sep 15 '17 at 21:33
  • @PeterShor I'm not so sure that it depends on synonyms as much as it depends on the different nuances and connotations of words depending on context. E.g. "You may be right, but you're still wrong." – Barmar Sep 18 '17 at 17:35
  • 1
    @Barmar: I thought OP meant things like People talking without speaking. People hearing without listening. (From Simon and Garfunkel.) You couldn't do that without synonyms. – Peter Shor Sep 19 '17 at 18:57
  • You can use the same word and intimate different meanings: You may be a father, but you're no father. Stress and context help deliver the meaning. – Arm the good guys in America Oct 18 '17 at 00:09
  • I think you've described it best yourself by pointing out there is one denotation but contrasting connotations. – Al Maki Oct 18 '17 at 15:23
  • “You’re pretty old, but you’re not very mature.” And, at the risk of distorting the concept beyond recognition, “It was the best of times; it was the worst of times” and “Water, water, everywhere, / Nor any drop to drink.” – Scott - Слава Україні Oct 20 '17 at 06:28

3 Answers3

2

paraprosdokian: a figure of speech in which the latter part of the sentence or phrase is surprising or unexpected in a way that causes the reader or listener to reframe or reinterpret the first part.

Using similar adjectives as contrast makes the audience think about the small differences between the two: biological vs. relational, in your example.

Richard Haven
  • 1,503
1

I'd also go for paraprosdokian. For some great, and often funny examples see http://www.economicnoise.com/2011/09/05/182-paraprosdokians/

  1. I asked God for a bike, but I know God doesn’t work that way. So I stole a bike and asked for forgiveness.

  2. Do not argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.

  3. I want to die peacefully in my sleep, like my grandfather. Not screaming and yelling like the passengers in his car.

  4. Going to church doesn’t make you a Christian any more than standing in a garage makes you a car.

NVZ
  • 22,590
David S Eddington
  • 19
0

I would say the phrase's overriding distinction is antithesis. At the same time, that the two concepts are distinct is not immediately obvious, indeed creates a surprise, sometimes humorous effect. That the distinction is so slight, the listener perceives the keen observation of the author, his or her sophistication, then by which we could tag it 'wit' or a 'witicism' (which is not a classical rhetorical device of course) I think it is a pun as well, a pun being a very wide-encompassing category.

At any rate rhetoric happens, it is a feature of human language that is not restricted to speech-making and essays as some posters here might suggest. It is the 'how' of a message, particularly the 'how' a message influence some desired outcome. It doesn't have to be deeply premeditated to be what it is.

Many text-book examples for the devices are indeed 'paradigm cases', but just as many on closer inspection reveal characteristics of other devices as well. The question becomes one of preponderance. In that simple classification something is lost, however, and in the examples given, too much would be lost to suffice a sole label. That is, of course, because none of us are aware of a specific named sub-set for the examples you have chosen. They are you might say the paradigm cases for a yet-unlabeled phenomenon. I think that means get to name it ;)

James
  • 159