In article , Russell Kent wrote:


Eric Miller wrote:

"Russell Kent" wrote in message
...
Eric Miller wrote:
I think that's called "damning with faint praise" =D

N.B. the above should read "feint praise"

feint:
(n.) 1. a false show; sham 2. a pretended blow or attack intended to
take the opponent off his guard, as in boxing or warfare
(vi., vt.) 1. to delivery such a blow or attack

This message is intended to educate, not mock or degrade.

Russell Kent

The correct expression and spelling is "faint praise"; the praise isn't
false (a feint) it's weak (faint).
Notice that faint is an adjective while feint is not.

http://www.cuyamaca.net/bruce.thomps...aintpraise.asp
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=faint

Interesting. I'm now equally uncertain as to which is the proper phrase. I
can see where one might use "faint (weak) praise" or "feint (false or
deceptive) praise". A brief Google search failed to turn up a definitive
page. Numerous usages exist for both forms.

The correct form *is* "faint praise". With faint having the meaning of
'lacking in conviction'.

A 'feint' is a deception that is *intended*to*be*believed*. Something that
is intended to mis-direct, distract, draw attention _away_ from the real
issue. What Juan Jiminez routinely does. grin

'Faint praise' is issued with the intent that it *NOT* be believed. The
intent is that you believe the _opposite_ of what was actually said. By
stating it with a market 'lack of conviction', one calls attention to the
falsity of the statement.

Marc Anthony's speech on the death of Caesar is the archtypical example
of 'damning with faint praise' -- "..For Brutus is an _honorable_man_.
So are they *all*, _honorable_men_...."

The _last_ thing Marc Anthony wanted was for people to "believe him".
He _is_ 'praising' them, with the _intent_ of being 'not believed'.