TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
> > If one is presumed innocent until proven guilty, and then in
> > trial found to be not guilty, doesn't that make "not guilty"
> > equal to "innocent"? At what point did the person's status
> > change from "presumed innocent" to "not guilty." Why is there a
> > distinction?
Here is a nice word to express the above, blatantly stolen from
Anu Garg's word list:
li.to.tes \'li-t-*-.te-z, 'lit-\ n or litotes [Gk litote-s, fr. litos
simple; akin to Gk leios smooth pl m more at LIME : understatement in
which an affirmative is expressed by the negative of the contrary (as in
"not a bad singer")
Thus, "not guilty" <> "innocent."
glen accardo glen -at- softint -dot- com
Software Interfaces, Inc. (713) 492-0707 x122
Houston, TX 77084