NP; Good as Gold: rhetorical questions

[Mike Jing]

 According to the OED:

*rhetorical*, adj
4. Designating a question asked only to produce an effect or make a
statement, rather than to elicit an answer or information. Chiefly in
*rhetorical
question*.

It may not be as effective as Cicero, but it does seem to fit the
definition.







On Sun, Jan 6, 2019 at 5:19 PM Jochen Stremmel <jstremmel at gmail.com> wrote:

> The question Lieberman reads – has written before he utters the maxim "No
> more rhetorical questions" – is not rhetorical, at least not as rhetorical
> as the famous one of Cicero »Quo usque tandem abutere, Catilina, patientia
> nostra?« or Does the Pope shit in the woods? or this one from around 1970:
> Does Rose Kennedy own a black dress? It has indeed several possible answers.
>
> And if it were a rhetorical question, directly answered by the questioner,
> the combination would be called Dialektikon. But that is not the case here.
>
>
> Am So., 6. Jan. 2019 um 21:00 Uhr schrieb Mike Jing <
> gravitys.rainbow.cn at gmail.com>:
>
>> I should have mentioned that in the book, Lieberman was characterized as a
>> poor writer who overly relies on rhetorical questions. So I thought this
>> was an obvious joke on him. The problem is that the common Chinese
>> translation of the term "rhetorical question" doesn't seem to include
>> cases
>> such as these, thus ruining the joke.
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Jan 5, 2019 at 7:03 PM Mike Jing <gravitys.rainbow.cn at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Thanks for the reply. The reason why I asked was that there are two ways
>> > to translate the term "rhetorical question" into Chinese and one of them
>> > does not include the case in this passage. I guess that's what people
>> > conventionally mean by rhetorical question, as you have mentioned, which
>> > does not include hypophora. In any case, I thought there was a joke in
>> > there, and also later where Lieberman changed the title of one of Gold's
>> > articles into a long-winded (rhetorical?) question.
>> >
>> >
>> > On Sat, Jan 5, 2019 at 6:34 PM <protomen at protonmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> It is a question and it is rhetorical, so there's at least a minor joke
>> >> in there, though I don't believe that's what people conventionally
>> mean by
>> >> rhetorical question nowadays. See "hypophora".
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
>> >> On Saturday, January 5, 2019 5:39 AM, Mike Jing <
>> >> gravitys.rainbow.cn at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > Just to make sure I got this right. In the following passage,
>> Lieberman
>> >> > first says "No more rhetorical questions", then immediately proves
>> >> himself
>> >> > wrong by using a rhetorical question in his own article. Is that
>> >> correct?
>> >> >
>> >> > Producing from somewhere inside his soiled and rumpled clothing a
>> copy
>> >> of
>> >> > the next issue of his magazine, he swept open the pages until he at
>> last
>> >> > found the one he wanted, his regular feature boldly headlined “An
>> >> Outspoken
>> >> > Editor Speaks His Mind, by M. G. Lieberman, Editor.” “Listen to what
>> >> I’ve
>> >> > got coming up,” he cried with excitement and prepared to read. “No
>> more
>> >> > rhetorical questions,” he exclaimed and began, “‘What, then, shall we
>> >> say
>> >> > to those who argue this may lead us into war? I say, unflinchingly,
>> then
>> >> > let us have war.’ How’s that? I express nothing but opprobrium and
>> scorn
>> >> > for the failure of nerve of all the members of the cowardly Eastern
>> >> liberal
>> >> > establishment. That’s a phrase,” he could not hold himself back from
>> >> > footnoting, “I got from Henry Kissinger.”
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >> >
>> >> > Pynchon-L: https://waste.org/mailman/listinfo/pynchon-l
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> --
>> Pynchon-L: https://waste.org/mailman/listinfo/pynchon-l
>>
>