The Volokh Conspiracy - More on Rhetorical Emphasis:

Commenter DJR offers a good concrete illustration for my argument about emphasis:

[1.] The plaintiff's argument totally misses the point! Section 157 of the Act does not even come close to covering the facts of this case!

[2.] The plaintiff's argument totally misses the point. Section 157 of the Act does not even come close to covering the facts of this case.

[3.] The plaintiff's argument totally misses the point. Section 157 does not even come close to covering the facts of this case.

[4.] The plaintiff's argument misses the point. Section 157 does not cover the facts of this case.

Which of these four examples is most likely to favorably dispose a judge to the rest of the author's argument?

	[Eugene Volokh, September 12, 2007 at 12:28pm] Trackbacks More on Rhetorical Emphasis: Commenter DJR offers a good concrete illustration for my argument about emphasis: [1.] The plaintiff's argument totally misses the point! Section 157 of the Act does not even *come close* to covering the facts of this case! [2.] The plaintiff's argument totally misses the point. Section 157 of the Act does not even come close to covering the facts of this case. [3.] The plaintiff's argument totally misses the point. Section 157 does not even come close to covering the facts of this case. [4.] The plaintiff's argument misses the point. Section 157 does not cover the facts of this case. Which of these four examples is most likely to favorably dispose a judge to the rest of the author's argument? Related Posts (on one page): More on Rhetorical Emphasis: Emphasis: