1

I often find myself in conversations with one friend in particular who says things and later denies that they had a specific meaning.

As an example consider two friends who get lost in the woods. One friend says to the other

"We should have went right at the lake, of course it was your idea to go left"

Then when pressed, the first friend would say "oh I wasn't blaming you, I just said it was your idea because it came to my mind".

It's extremely clear the friend was blaming the other, there's no other rationale for adding "of course it was your idea" other than just a total non-sequiter which is extremely unlikely and not how people talk.

Another example of this is the political criticism of people "just asking questions". E.g. People advancing conspiracy theories under the guise of "just asking questions", when it is clear they in fact believe the conspiracy, as there is no other explanation for focusing on those questions so regularly.

A final example is a mob boss who says "it would be a shame if something were to happen to your family", but if pressed would simply claim the statement was not a threat, "I just thought it would be a shame..."

I know this is similar and related to gaslighting, but the phenomena seems to be distinct in that it has to do with denying or feigning extremely obvious subtext from language choice.

Is there a specific term for this?

1 Answer 1

0

I think you're looking for (conversational) implicature, where you express a meaning indirectly. A famous example in linguistics is Have you stopped beating your wife?, which states that you have comitted domestic violence without actually saying it.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.