. . . Ann Romney's speech:
Mitt doesn't like to talk about how he has helped others because he sees it as a privilege, not a political talking point.
Here's what she should have said:
Mitt doesn't like to talk about how he has helped others because he sees it, not as a political talking point, but as a privilege.
Reversing the order of the contrasting motives puts the emphasis where it belongs, on privilege rather than talking point.
Mrs. Romney's version subordinates Mr. Romney's true motive, his view that helping others is a privilege, to the false motive, talking point.
By reversing the order this way, she amplifies her implicit criticism of other politicians: those who eagerly talk about how they have helped others, but for the wrong reason. (President Obama, anyone?)
Her manner of expression draws attention away from her husband and his pure motive for reticence about his good works.
This is not a matter of grammar or meaning; it's a question of style or rhetoric.
Reversing the order of the two elements turns what is called a loose sentence into what is called a periodic sentence.
A loose sentence quickly states the main point, then attaches additional information like a tail on a kite, "its tail of dependencies fluttering at the end." Mrs. Romney points us toward the tail (Mr. Obama's shortcomings), not the kite (her husband's virtues).
The periodic sentence, by contrast, "is like a ceremony in which the rolling out of the red carpet prepares for the entrance of the chief dignitary."
(Martin and Ohmann, The Logic and Rhetoric of Exposition)
Mrs. Romney's sentence attracted media attention for its meaning. Rewritten by a good editor, the sentence might also justifiably have drawn praise for its more graceful expression.
Comments