Literary Terms And Fallacies, From English Iii Language And Composition Ap

Front 1

Pathos

Back 1

Qualities of a fictional or non-fictional work that evoke sorrow or pity. Over-emotionalism can be the result of an excess of pathos.

Hint 1

"You don't understand!!! They killed my dog!!!"

Front 2

Ethos

Back 2

Ethical appeal; when a writer tries to persuade the audience to respect and believe him or her based on presentation of image of self through text. Reputation is sometimes a factor in ethical appeals, but in all cases the aim is to gain the audience's confidence.

Hint 2

"You must do this if you are a good person."

Front 3

Logos

Back 3

Human reasoning which seeks to attain universal understanding and harmony; appeal to logic.

Hint 3

Facts and figures

Front 4

Deductive Reasoning

Back 4

A form of reasoning that begins with a generalization, then applies the generalization to a specific case or cases.

Hint 4

Generalization to a specific case

Front 5

Inductive Reasoning

Back 5

A form of reasoning which works from a body of facts to the formulation of a generalization; frequently used in science and history.

Hint 5

Specific facts to a generalization

Front 6

Red Herring

Back 6

When a writer raises an irrelevant issue to draw attention away from the real issue.

Hint 6

"Let's talk about this other issue now instead."

Front 7

Zeugma

Back 7

The writer uses one word to govern several successive words or clauses.

Hint 7

She discovered New York and her world.

Front 8

Litotes

Back 8

Opposite of hyperbole; litotes intensifies an idea by understatement.

Hint 8

"It wasnt my best moment."

Front 9

Enythymeme

Back 9

A syllogism in which one of the premises - often the major premise - is unstated, but meant to be understood.

Hint 9

"Children should be seen, not heard. Be quiet, John." (the minor premise that John is a child is left to the ingenuity of the reader)

Front 10

Syllogism

Back 10

A form of reasoning in which two statements are made and a logical conclusion is drawn from them.

Hint 10

This is a form of deductive reasoning.

Front 11

Verisimilitude

Back 11

The appearance of truth, actuality, or reality; what seems to be true in fiction.

Hint 11

A twisted reality; a world that is not really as it seems; perhaps untrue

Front 12

Tone

Back 12

A writer's attitude toward his or her subject matter revealed through diction, figurative language, and organization of the sentence and global levels.

Hint 12

How does the author feel about his or her subject?

Front 13

Synecdoche

Back 13

Part of something is used to stand for the whole.

Hint 13

Threads for clothes and wheels for cars are examples of this.

Front 14

Non-sequitur

Back 14

Latin for "it does not follow." When one statement isn't logically connected to another.

Hint 14

"That doesn't make sense!"

Front 15

Satire

Back 15

A work that reveals a critical attitude toward some element of human behavior by portrating it in an extreme way. Satire doesn't simply abuse (as in invective) or get personal (as in sarcasm). Satire targets groups or large concepts rather than individuals.

Hint 15

Many comedy skits take real-life events and portray it in an extreme way, often revealing a critical message.

Front 16

Post Hoc Ergo Proper Hoc

Back 16

Latin for "after this, therefore because of this." When a writer implies that because one thing follows another, the first caused the second. Establishes an unjustified link between cause and effect.

Hint 16

"I danced and then it rained. Therefore, I made it rain."

Front 17

Begging the Question

Back 17

A logical fallacy where the conclusion of the argument is hidden among its assumptions - and so the conclsuion, not surprisingly, follows the premises. Very similar to CIRCULAR REASONING.

Hint 17

"If these people are guilty, and have shown no remorse, this can only mean that they are bad people, and we can therefore conclude that they are guilty."

Front 18

Circular Reasoning

Back 18

A logical fallacy where the conclusion of the argument is hidden among its assumptions - and so the conclsuion, not surprisingly, follows the premises. Very similar to BEGGING THE QUESTION.

Hint 18

The Bible tells me that faith in God is a good basis for forming beliefs. In general, what the Bible says is true. Therefore, faith in God is a good basis for forming beliefs.

Front 19

Straw-Man Argument

Back 19

Logical fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position. To "set up a straw man" or "set up a straw-man argument" is to create a position that is easy to refute, then attribute that position to the opponent.

Hint 19

Person A: I don't think children should run into the busy streets.
Person B: I think that it would be foolish to lock children up all day.

Front 20

Ad-Hominem Argument

Back 20

Latin for "against the man." When a writer personally attacks his or her opponents instead of their arguments.

Hint 20

"What do you know? You smoke cigarettes all day!"

Front 21

Hasty Generalization

Back 21

The precipitous move from true assertions about ONE or a FEW instances to dubious or even false assertions about ALL. Usually lies behind a stereotype.

Hint 21

I have met ten Hungarians, and all ten of them are bad at speaking English. Therefore, all Hungarians do not speak English very well.

Front 22

Antithesis

Back 22

A balancing of two opposite or contrastic words, phrases, or clauses.

Hint 22

Brutus: "Not that I loved Caesar less, but that I loved Rome more."

Front 23

Bandwagon Appeal

Back 23

Trying to establish something that is true because everyone believes it is true.

Hint 23

"How can you argue that God doesn't exist? Everyone believes in God!"

Front 24

Fallacy of Many Questions

Back 24

A question that is unanswerable unless all three of its implicit presuppositions are true. Example: When did you stop beating your wife? (it implies that you have a wife, that you had beaten her, and that you had stopped beating her)

Hint 24

"Does your mother know you're gay?"

Front 25

Ambiguity

Back 25

An event or situation that may be interpreted in more than one way. Also, the manner of expression of such event or situation may be ambiguatious. Artful language may be ambiguous. Unintentional ambiguity is usually vagueness.

Hint 25

"Black Dog House" - A black house for all dogs? Or a house only for black dogs? What is the term "BLACK" referring to?

Also consider: "People have equal rights" and "Everyone has a right to property." Does that mean that everyone has an equal right to property?

Front 26

Death by a Thousand Qualifications

Back 26

A misleading statement that makes a strong claim, but does not reveal its qualifcations. Once the qualifications are revealed, the original description loses all content.

Hint 26

"Young Smith was the best student I've ever taught in an English course." That may be true, but how long have you been teaching? Only one year? And you only had 8 students in the course?

Front 27

Oversimplification

Back 27

Generalizations that exaggerate and therefore oversimplify the truth. Usually can be disproved with a simple counter-statement. Example: "Taxation is unfair." Some taxes are unfair, but some are fair.

Hint 27

"Poverty causes crime." "Taxation is unfair." "Truth is stranger than fiction." "True stories are more amazing than fictional stories."

Front 28

False Dichotomy

Back 28

Either/or reasoning; this is a more complex form of oversimplification. A pair of contrary alternatives is presented, and mere contraries do not exhaust the possibilities. There are other alternatives.

Hint 28

"You are either with me or against me! No other alternatives!"

Front 29

Equivocation

Back 29

Latin for "equal voice" - that is, giving utterance to two meanings at the same time in one word or phrase. "Euthanasia is a good death. A good death is dying peacefully at an old age. Therefore, euthanasia is dying peacefully at an old age." This is untrue because euthanasia can not be defined as dying peacefully in one's old age. Euthanasia technically means helping kill another person, and young people can be euthanized also.

Hint 29

Equal Voice

Front 30

Fallacy of Composition

Back 30

Logical fallacy in which the reasoning commits the error of arguing from the true premise that each member of a group has a certain property to the not necessarily true conclusion that the group (the composition) itself has the property. Example: Because John is the best player at forward, David is the best center, and so on, therefore the team of John, David... is the best team.

Hint 30

Laura is the best at math. Jason is the best at science. Daniel is the best at English. David is the best at social studies. Put them together and you have the best academic group ever.

Front 31

Fallacy of Division

Back 31

Logical fallacy that occurs when one reasons logically that something true of a thing must also be true of at least some of its constituents. Example: If a plane can fly across the ocean, then one of its engines can also fly across the ocean.

Hint 31

The average American family has 1.8 children, so does it follow that your brother and sister-in-law are likely to have 1.8 children?

Front 32

Poisoning the Well

Back 32

This kind of reasoning is an attempt to poison the well - that is, an attempt to shift attention from the merits of the argument - the validity of the reasoning, the truth of the claims - to the source of origin of the argument. Example: Hitler supported equality of men and women, which makes that immoral. Or: A scoundrel believes the world is round, therefore the world is flat.

Hint 32

"You know, Hitler supported gender equality. That makes it immoral."

Front 33

Genetic Fallacy

Back 33

Here the error takes the form of arguing against some claim by pointing out that its origin (genesis) is tainted or that it was invented by someone desrving our contempt. Example: "The Declaration of Independence is bad because Thomas Jefferson owned slaves."

Hint 33

"Capital punishment arose in barbarous times; but we claim to be civilized; therefore, we should discard this relic of the past." Really? Just because capital punishment originated in barbarous times?

Front 34

Appeal to Authority

Back 34

Using a notable person and his or her views and actions to attach weight on an argument. The person is not an expert on the issue and should not have any credibility. Example: "Capital punishment is good because Abraham Lincoln, a great president, signed many death warrants during the Civil War."

Hint 34

"John is a Nobel Prize-winning physicist! And he thinks that marijuana should be legalized! So there!"

Front 35

Slippery Slope

Back 35

An argument that says if something is allowed, then it will be just the first step down the path that leads to bad things. Also known as the wedge argument, it implies that the first step necessarily leads to the second, and so on down the slope to disaster, when in fact there is no necessary slide from the first step to the second at all. Example: Cars cause more deaths than guns do. If you oppose handguns on the ground that doing so would save lives of the innocent, you'll soon find yourself wanting to outlaw cars."

Hint 35

"If we let gay people marry, then people will eventually want to marry their own dogs! Then people will want to marry their own inanimate objects!"

Front 36

Appeal to Ignorance

Back 36

An argument that invites the audience to draw an inference from a premise that is unquestionably true - but what is that premise? It asserts that there is something "we don't know." But what we DON'T know can't be EVIDENCE for or against anything! Our ignorance is no reason for believing anything. Example: "No one knows how many innocent people have been wrongfully executed, therefore the death penalty is too risky."

Hint 36

"No one knows how many innocent people have been wrongfully executed, therefore the death penalty is too risky."

Front 37

False Analogy

Back 37

An analogy where the two things differ in essential and relevant respects. Example: "Students should be allowed to look at their textbooks during tests. After all, surgeons have X rays to guide them during an operation, lawyers have briefs to guide them during a trial, carpenters have blueprints to guide them when they are building a house. Why then, shouldn't students be allowed to look at their textbooks during an examination?" The comparison fails because doctors, lawyers, and carpenters aren't taking a test to see how much they have learned. The essential situation is different.

Hint 37

"Students should be allowed to look at their textbooks during tests. After all, surgeons have X rays to guide them during an operation, lawyers have briefs to guide them during a trial, carpenters have blueprints to guide them when they are building a house. Why then, shouldn't students be allowed to look at their textbooks during an examination?"

Front 38

Protecting the Hypothesis

Back 38

A tactic where the arguer protects a hypothesis by abandoning adjacent or connected hypotheses. No matter what observations are brought against it, the arguer will count nothing as falsifying it.

Hint 38

I do not fully understand this fallacy. ~Dat Le