# Is there a simple rhetorical term for implying something untrue by qualifying clauses?

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-a-simple-rhetorical-term-for-implying-something-untrue-by-qualifying-clauses/745676>\
**Category:** Factual Questions\
**Created:** [February 10, 2016, 2:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-a-simple-rhetorical-term-for-implying-something-untrue-by-qualifying-clauses/745676 "2016-02-10T02:58:37Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 3\
**Page:** 2

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Isilder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/cc9497/32.png) [@Isilder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Isilder)\
**Post date:** [February 12, 2016, 6:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-a-simple-rhetorical-term-for-implying-something-untrue-by-qualifying-clauses/745676/21 "2016-02-12T06:59:42Z")

</div>

> [@UDS](#):
>
> No. The logical fallacy is the inference that, because John hasn’t stolen this year, it is more likely that he did so in previous years. But it’s the hearers who make this inference, not the speaker.

Not all loaded questions contain a contradiction with reality and are unanswerable.  
"Did you break less windows today ? " (than yesterday.)  
You could answer "No ! " and not say anything that is a lie.

Of course if you just say “no, not less”… the listener could infer that you did break windows …

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![PatrickLondon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/patricklondon/32/4422_2.png) [@PatrickLondon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PatrickLondon)\
**Post date:** [February 12, 2016, 7:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-a-simple-rhetorical-term-for-implying-something-untrue-by-qualifying-clauses/745676/22 "2016-02-12T07:19:20Z")

</div>

One classic piece of civilservantese is “we were, perhaps, economical with the truth”.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![scr4](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/59ef9b/32.png) [@scr4](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/scr4)\
**Post date:** [February 12, 2016, 1:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-a-simple-rhetorical-term-for-implying-something-untrue-by-qualifying-clauses/745676/23 "2016-02-12T13:30:14Z")

</div>

> [@muttrox](#):
>
> Not a rhetorical term, but… The exception proves the rule. The phrasing implies that “this year” is an exception, so you are implying the rule is the opposite of that exception.

That was my first thought too. An example of “exception that proves the rule” would be a “No parking 9-5” sign, which implies that parking is allowed before 9 and after 5.

[Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-a-simple-rhetorical-term-for-implying-something-untrue-by-qualifying-clauses/745676.md?page=1)