1

How is this writer's technique called in English when the author seems to address someone in his epistle or a letter, but, in fact, is only indirectly addressing him (because, for example, that person is definitely not among the recipients of the letter)?

For example,

(Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law. They show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts sometimes accusing them and at other times even defending them.) This will take place on the day when God judges people’s secrets through Jesus Christ, as my gospel declares. Now you, if you call yourself a Jew; if you rely on the law and boast in God; if you know his will and approve of what is superior because you are instructed by the law; if you are convinced that you are a guide for the blind, a light for those who are in the dark, an instructor of the foolish, a teacher of little children, because you have in the law the embodiment of knowledge and truth— you, then, who teach others, do you not teach yourself? You who preach against stealing, do you steal? (Bible, The Epistle of Apostle Paul to Romans, 2:14-21)

The epistle quoted above was not addressed to the Jews, but rather to the Christian believers living in Rome at that time. Jews were not among the recipients of this epistle. However, the author is using pronoun "you" extensively while talking about the Jews -- as if he were directly addressing them in the epistle.

Here is another example (mine):

Our President has been saying that such recessions usually take only two to three months, and that they all got over with their recent recessions in such countries like Jumbiya and Delva. He even goes further and claims that this recession only hurt 30% of our economy, while the other 70% are still just fine. Well, sorry Mister President, but all your estimates are wrong. I don't know which sources you referred to to learn about the situations in Jumbiya and Delva, but the sad fact is they are still in the sate of a deep crisis, showing no signs of any possible recovery any time soon. Besides, where on earth did you get those 30%? It's not 30%, it's 67%! I would say that in the most favorable scenario...

Here the speaker is addressing his audience, which, in fact, does not include the President. Most likely, the President will never read this article and the author knows that very well. Nevertheless, the author is still acting as if the President were sitting right in front of him and listening to him carefully.

How is this technique called? Is there any specific term besides just something like "rhetorical speech"?

Improve this question
13
  • 1
    I think Paul probably was addressing Jews: there were many in Rome at that time. The technique in your own example is certainly common nowadays and deserves a name but I don't know of one. It's a kind of journalese and is pretentious in suggesting you have the ear of the president. In most examples I can think of the writer wants you to think them brave for speaking out. And the "sorry" is camp. Well spotted!
    – Old Brixtonian
    Commented Jun 13, 2021 at 2:24
  • @OldBrixtonian - “I think Paul probably was addressing Jews: there were many in Rome at that time” – Acts 18:2 says, “Claudius had ordered all the Jews to depart from Rome”. It is a historical fact that Cladius deported all Jews from Rome at that time (reported to us by Suetonius and Paulus Orosius). Of course, it is possible that the Romans was written a few years after Claudius’ death, but that doesn’t guarantee that the Jews had already rushed back into Rome at the time when Paul wrote these words. Besides, the whole epistle is addressed to Christians, not the Jews.
    – brilliant
    Commented Jun 13, 2021 at 5:50
  • 1
    You forget that all the first Christians were Jews, and even after the faith had spread to the Gentiles many Jewish Christians still considered themselves bound by the Jewish Law.
    – Kate Bunting
    Commented Jun 13, 2021 at 8:14
  • What you are saying is wrong. This is a diatribe directed at James and his follows of the Jewish sect started by Jesus and continued by his brother. The disagreement is about circumcision Quote ....**(Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves........ What is a gentile? What is the difference between a gentile and a Jew. Circumcision. In fact The Jewish sect that Jesus founded only accept people who had been circumcised But Paul did not recognise that and around 50AD Paul made a grab for control.
    – Brad
    Commented Jun 13, 2021 at 8:24
  • 1
    The epistle quoted above was not addressed to the Jews, but rather to the Christian believers living in Rome at that time. In fact it was addressed at a very special group of Jews.
    – Brad
    Commented Jun 13, 2021 at 10:49

3 Answers 3

Reset to default
1

As a native speaker, I can't think of a particular name for this. There may not be one. (But someone is welcome to correct me!)

Improve this answer
1

Perhaps the term you're looking for is open letter.

Wikipedia gives the definition:

An open letter is a letter that is intended to be read by a wide audience, or a letter intended for an individual, but that is nonetheless widely distributed intentionally.

Open letters are usually works of persuasive writing, and address the recipient although they are also meant to persuade the wider audience.

I don't know enough about the history of the bible to know whether Paul's letters are true examples, but I think this may be the term you're looking for.

Improve this answer
1
  • That's a thought.
    – Old Brixtonian
    Commented Jun 14, 2021 at 8:49
-1

Actually the examples are different;

How is this writer's technique called in English? I can answer for the first example but not for the second.

The first example being written in the Second-Person.

Also let us define that there is a difference in "Style/technique" and "use".

How the speech or letter is intended to be used, or is used, does not define the style or technique. Either could be used in an "open letter" but that is a use not a "style"

The Second-Person.

The second-person point of view belongs to the person (or people) being addressed. This is the “you” perspective. Once again, the biggest indicator of the second person is the use of second-person pronouns: you, your, yours, yourself, yourselves.

You can wait in here and make yourself at home.

Or in the case of St Paul

Now you, if you call yourself a Jew; if you rely on the law and boast in God; if you know his will and approve of what is superior because you are instructed by the law; if you are convinced that you are a guide for the blind, a light for those who are in the dark, an instructor of the foolish, a teacher of little children, because you have in the law the embodiment of knowledge and truth— you, then, who teach others, do you not teach yourself? You who preach against stealing, do you steal?

Ref Grammarly

The second example just being, well what? A piece of writing. It has been described as;

Here the speaker is addressing his audience

So I would think it is fair to describe this as a "Speech"

You is used in two question during the speech but it certainly does not do enough to designate this as being written in the second-person

speech noun (FORMAL TALK); a formal talk given usually to a large number of people on a special occasion: Ref C.E.D.

Improve this answer
8
  • (1) You are saying that the technique in the example of Epistle to Romans is called “the Second-Person”, but the problem is that this technique then is used in both addressing the Romans and the Jews in that epistle. However, there is a big difference between the case with former and the case with the latter: while there is no doubt that the Romans will receive and read that epistle, there is little chance (or may be even no chance at all) that the Jews will also read it. And the author knew that.
    – brilliant
    Commented Jun 13, 2021 at 6:48
  • (2) The author is addressing Romans directly, knowing that they will read his letter; however, he is addressing the Jews in a kind of “conjectural” way, knowing that they will most likely not read these words about them (in fact, whatever he writes there about the Jews is intended for the Christians in Rome, not for the Jews). Sadly, the term “the Second-Person” doesn’t make that differentiation. I need a term that would describe exactly that kind of "conjectural" way of addressing, that is, only implying, but not really addressing -- despite the fact of using pronouns "you" and "yours".
    – brilliant
    Commented Jun 13, 2021 at 6:48
  • The writing style is one thing how it is used is a sperate entity I clearly pointed this out in my answer. Reggae music is reggae music whether it is used to dance to, in an advertisement, as a sound track or background music during ice skating.
    – Brad
    Commented Jun 13, 2021 at 6:53
  • So, what is the term describing that kind of use then that is seen in case with the Jews, but not in case of Romans?
    – brilliant
    Commented Jun 13, 2021 at 7:28
  • I have re-read your answer several times and I still cannot understand why you call two examples in my question different. In both cases we have the general audience that the author is writing to (citizens of Rome in the first case, and the readers in the second case), and in both cases we have some people that are implied, but not really addressed (despite using "you" pronouns) because those people will not be among the recipients of the writing (in the first case it's the Jews, and in the second case it's the President) and the authors know that. So why are the two examples different?
    – brilliant
    Commented Jun 13, 2021 at 8:12

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .