NEGOCOACH
228
Origin : Classical rhetoric

📜 Classical rhetoric

Oratory & argumentation

Aristotle ("Rhetoric"), Quintilian; C. Perelman & L. Olbrechts-Tyteca, "The New Rhetoric", 1958; A. Schopenhauer, "The Art of Being Right".

Full detail in the “Origin & history” section below.

228

Preterition

Rhetoric & verbal sparring Technique 228 / 360
Alexandre Baumberger

Author of the library

Alexandre Baumberger

Negotiation lecturer at KEDGE Business School

A rare threefold background serving negotiation: teaching, commercial justice and audit, backed by experience as a company director in Bordeaux.

  • Teaching, KEDGE Business School Negotiation lecturer since 2014 (12 years).
  • Commercial justice, Commercial Court Judge from 2018 to 2026: litigation, then insolvency proceedings.
  • Audit & advisory, over 20 years Tax, employment and financial audit in major firms, for large groups.
Full profile Contact him
In brief

Preterition consists in declaring that one will pass over a matter in silence, while stating it in the very same breath ("I shall not speak of..."). In negotiation, it serves to make an argument heard while absolving oneself of having advanced it, placing the opponent in the position of being unable to hit back without acknowledging the very point you claim to be leaving unsaid.

Save to favourites Practise this technique
Reading level

At a glance

Its family profile at a glance

Effectiveness Psychologicalimpact Discretion Preparation Relationalrisk Ethics
6.3 / 10 Tactical potential

Vigilance: moderate (4.5/10) · Preparation required: 5/10

Grounding in the source school Documented school

Indicative profile: it situates the “Rhetoric & verbal sparring” family as the Classical rhetoric school practises it, not this technique taken in isolation. Techniques from the same family and school therefore share the same profile. NEGOCOACH editorial rating out of 10, non-experimental · the higher the “relational risk” value, the more costly the technique is to the relationship.

NEGOCOACH assessment

How to read this rating

Tactical potential 6.3/10 (effectiveness, impact, discretion) and vigilance moderate (relational and ethical risk): two distinct readings, deliberately never merged into a single score that would reward risk. NEGOCOACH editorial rating calibrated from the “Rhetoric & verbal sparring” family and the “Classical rhetoric” school. Each criterion is rated out of 10; click to understand what it measures.

  • Effectiveness 7/10 · High

    How far the technique can carry the negotiation in the intended direction when it is well executed.

  • Psychological impact 6/10 · High

    Strength of the effect produced on the counterpart's perceptions, emotions and decisions.

  • Discretion 6/10 · High

    How hard it is for the other party to notice the technique is being used. A high value = very discreet.

  • Preparation 5/10 · Moderate

    The information, analysis and rehearsal required upfront to use it effectively.

  • Relational risk 3/10 · Low

    Potential cost to the relationship and to trust if the technique is spotted, refused or fails. A high value = riskier.

  • Ethics 5/10 · Moderate

    Moral acceptability: fairness, transparency and respect for the counterpart's autonomy. A high value = more defensible.

Level of evidence

Documented school

The school this technique stems from is documented by recognised work and established practice, without experimental consensus. This indicator qualifies the school, not this technique taken in isolation.

Indicative NEGOCOACH editorial rating, for teaching purposes. For “Relational risk”, a high value signals a cost to the relationship, not a quality.

Preterition in a nutshell

Origin & history

Preterition (Latin praeteritio, "the act of passing over") is one of the oldest figures of Roman forensic rhetoric. Cicero made masterly use of it in his pleadingsi, and Quintilian theorised it in his Institutio Oratoria as a tool of muted accusation. Fontanier classes it among the figures of thought in his Figures du discours.

Definition and principle

Preterition is the prototype of the paradoxical figure: the act of stating contradicts what is stated. It exploits a powerful cognitive mechanismi: one cannot help thinking of what one is told to forget. It differs from paralipsis by a nuance of insistence: preterition announces a total silence that it then breaks ("I shall say nothing of..."), whereas paralipsis announces a passing over ("I shall not dwell on..."). The effect is to convey a content while dissociating oneself from it.

Concrete examples of application

Application by context

The same technique, across every negotiation settings

Context 1 / 8

Sales negotiation

A salesperson: "I won't even mention our competitor's after-sales service; everyone knows about their turnaround times, so let's focus on our 48-hour guarantee." The opponent's weak spot is planted, then left to the customer's imagination.

How to apply it

Place the preterition just before your strong argument: the doubt cast over the competitor prepares the ground for your differentiating benefit.

Strengths

Suggests a competitor's weakness without having to prove it or name it precisely.

Weaknesses

The absence of proof makes the insinuation fragile: a buyer may demand the precise fact you are refusing to state.

Context 2 / 8

Procurement negotiation

The buyer to the supplier: "I'll pass over the fact that your competitors are 15% cheaper; price isn't my only criterion." The reference price is anchored as a sledgehammer argument, while preserving the appearance of a buyer not obsessed with cost.

How to apply it

Use preterition to inject an alternative (a cheaper competitor, a rival offer received) without having to document it, while appearing open-minded.

Strengths

Creates implicit pricing pressure without entering a battle of verifiable quotes.

Weaknesses

If the seller asks for the competitor's exact figures, the bluff may be exposed.

Context 3 / 8

Labour negotiation

A union representative: "I won't mention the record profits announced last month; that's not the purpose of these pay talks." The financial result is placed before management's eyes to justify increases, without being made the official argument.

How to apply it

Use preterition to summon an awkward fact for the other side while presenting it as off-topic, which prevents them from responding to it head-on.

Strengths

Recalls an uncomfortable figure without opening an accounting debate in which one could be countered.

Weaknesses

Management may seize the opening to reframe those very profits to its own advantage (investment, overheads).

Context 4 / 8

Crisis management

In the thick of an internal crisis, a manager: "I shall name no one, but everyone knows who failed to do their job." Responsibility is assigned collectively without naming names, sustaining pressure without formalising the accusation.

How to apply it

In a tense situation, preterition lets you signal that you know while leaving an honourable way out; the vagueness protects de-escalation.

Strengths

Exerts a diffuse threat without crystallising a named confrontation.

Weaknesses

The vagueness may be felt as cowardly or unfair by those who feel targeted yet cannot defend themselves.

Context 5 / 8

Political negotiation

A speaker at the rostrum: "I shall not recall the scandals that marked this term of office; decency forbids me." The scandals are summoned before public opinion under the guise of restraint.

How to apply it

Reinforce the preterition with a moral justification ("decency", "respect for the victims") that makes the attack all the more telling by contrast.

Strengths

Attacks forcefully while laying claim to the high ground; the sovereign figure of parliamentary jousting.

Weaknesses

A very well-known ploy: the opponent can call it out as a device ("you are recalling them by saying you won't").

Context 6 / 8

Real-estate negotiation

A buyer to the seller: "I won't labour the F-rated energy performance certificate; we all know what that means in terms of works." The poor energy rating is brandished as leverage for a price reduction, without any counter-costing.

How to apply it

Use preterition to invoke an objectifiable defect (a survey, an easement) while avoiding a precise estimate of the works, which is often disputable.

Strengths

Turns a defect into a price argument without committing to a costing that could be talked down.

Weaknesses

The seller can turn the silence against you by producing a modest works quote that defuses the argument.

Context 7 / 8

Cross-cultural negotiation

A Western negotiator facing a Chinese partner: "I won't return to the question of intellectual property; I know it's a sensitive one." The critical subject is put on the table while signalling respect for the other party's sensibilities.

How to apply it

In high-context cultures, preterition allows a taboo subject to be broached through the implicit, a mode of communication that is expected and prized.

Strengths

Introduces a sensitive point without confronting it head-on, which preserves the relationship in indirect contexts.

Weaknesses

May create a misunderstanding with a counterpart from a direct culture who expected the subject to be raised plainly in order to be dealt with.

Context 8 / 8

Family negotiation

In an inheritance dispute, a brother: "I'll say nothing about the loans I made to our father; now isn't the time." The sums advanced are put on the table as a moral claim, without any formal demand.

How to apply it

Within a family, preterition evokes a past contribution without putting a figure on it openly, sparing the taboo of money among relatives.

Strengths

Brings a financial merit to bear on the division without breaking the family pact of not keeping accounts.

Weaknesses

Once uncovered, it comes across as a hidden calculation that betrays trust and hardens the conflict.

Counter-techniques

Spot and neutralise this technique

Negotiation is also played on defence. Here is how to recognise this technique when it is used against you, and turn it around.

Detect

The signals that give it away

  • A false alternative ("it's A or B")
  • A sweeping generalisation
  • A loaded question

Neutralise

The counters that defuse it

  • Refuse the false dilemma: "there is a third way"
  • Ask for precise facts
  • Break the question down before answering

Turn around

Turn it into an advantage

Send the question back to its author to regain the initiative.

The trap to avoid

Answering on the terms imposed by the other side.

In brief

  • Difficulty: Beginner
  • Estimated effectiveness: High
  • Time to implement: Short
  • Fields of application: Political debate, Pleading, Sales, Labour negotiation
  • Synonyms: Paralipsis, Occupatio, Apophasis
  • Tags: insinuation, figure of thought, Cicero, muted attack, the unsaid

Strengths and weaknesses

Preterition makes an idea surface in the other party's mind while denying having stated it: it exploits the cognitive impossibility of ignoring what one is told to forget. It shields the speaker (denial of responsibility) and clothes the attack in feigned restraint. Its limitation: it is one of the most recognisable figures, and therefore easy to unmask and turn back.

When to use this technique

Use it to suggest without proving, to invoke an awkward fact or to land an attack while remaining presentable, above all before a third party. Avoid it against a counterpart who knows it (they will name it), and reserve it for insinuations you could, if need be, stand behind.

How to recognise and counter this technique

Recognise it: the sentence announces a silence and then breaks it at once ("I'll say nothing of... but..."). Neutralise it: name the device ("you've just said it") and ask to deal with the point openly, which dissolves the effect of insinuation. Turn it back: seize the subject head-on and on the facts, forcing the other party to defend an attack they meant to dodge.

Limits and ethics

The practice becomes underhand when it insinuates a fact that is false, unverifiable or defamatory under cover of not stating it: this is slander by preterition. The risk is greatest in public, where the insinuation lingers in memory even once refuted. Ethical rule: use preterition only for what you would hold to be true and defensible out in the open.

Variants and related techniques

A near-twin of Paralipsis, it combines with Rhetorical concession and Irony to reinforce the effect of feigned restraint. A close relative of occupatio and of insinuation. It stands opposed to direct assertion and to reasoned demonstration.

Going further

  • Cicero, Speeches against Verres, 70 BC.
  • Quintilian, Institutio Oratoria, Book IX, 1st century.
  • Georges Molinié, Dictionnaire de rhétorique, Le Livre de Poche, 1992.

Objectives of the technique

  • Introduce a sensitive argument, a grievance or a balance of power without frontally owning responsibility for it (disowning authorship of the attack)
  • Lay down a threat or a consequence in veiled terms, preserving the relationship and one's own image of good faith
  • Anchor in the other party's mind a piece of information unfavourable to them while appearing magnanimous for "not labouring the point"
  • Regain the initiative on a delicate point one dare not raise directly, by slipping it in under cover of passing it over in silence
  • Test the counterpart's reaction to a risky subject without fully committing

Famous cases

Sales · The supplier who "won't mention" the late payments: When renegotiating an annual contract, a supplier wants to secure a higher deposit without antagonising a long-standing client. Rather than reproaching the past unpaid invoices directly, he slips in: "I won't even go back over the few instalments that dragged on last year; that's not the point, and I know it wasn't your intention. Let's focus on the future: I'm proposing a 30% deposit." The grievance is laid down, heard, and used to underpin the request, without the supplier having formally "accused" the client. A representative case, not attributed to any real company.

Politics · "I won't speak of my opponent's past": In a debate, a candidate declares: "I won't stoop to raising the affairs in which my opponent has been named; that would be unworthy of this debate." By announcing that he won't speak of them, he makes them precisely the subject in the public's mind, while casting himself as someone above the fray. A scenario representative of a classic use of preterition in political rhetoric, with no attribution to a real person.

Common mistakes

  • Overloading the device: piling up preteritions ("I won't say... I'll pass over... I'll leave unsaid...") makes the manoeuvre visible and makes it read as crude manipulation
  • Being too explicit about the content one claims to be leaving unsaid, to the point where the feint becomes a disguised frontal attack that antagonises the counterpart
  • Using preterition on a false or unverifiable point: if the other party picks up the insinuation and dismantles it, the speaker loses all credibility
  • Deploying the technique against a direct or wary counterpart who replies "then say it plainly", leaving you trapped between owning it or backing down
  • Confusing preterition with a genuine concession: letting it be believed that one is giving up an argument one has just used creates a sense of duplicity if it is unmasked

Scientific foundations

  • Chaïm Perelman & Lucie Olbrechts-Tyteca (1958) The New Rhetoric: A Treatise on Argumentation Presses Universitaires de France (PUF)
  • Robert B. Cialdini (2001) Influence: Science and Practice Allyn & Bacon

Quick exercise

Test yourself before answering

Answer in your head, then reveal the solution. Memory is built through active recall.

1 Quels signaux doivent vous alerter ?
  • A false alternative ("it's A or B")
  • A sweeping generalisation
  • A loaded question
2 Quelles parades appliquer ?
  • Refuse the false dilemma: "there is a third way"
  • Ask for precise facts
  • Break the question down before answering

Frequently asked questions

The questions we get most

What is the "Preterition" technique?

Preterition consists in declaring that one will pass over a matter in silence, while stating it in the very same breath ("I shall not speak of..."). In negotiation, it serves to make an argument heard while absolving oneself of having advanced it, placing the opponent in the position of being unable to hit back without acknowledging the very point you claim to be leaving unsaid.

Is the "Preterition" technique ethical?

It sits on the line: effective, but it can tip into manipulation if it exploits an information asymmetry. Use it with measure and without deliberate deceit.

How do you defend against "Preterition"?

Answering on the terms imposed by the other side. The right reflex: refuse the false dilemma: "there is a third way".

What is the "Preterition" technique based on?

NEGOCOACH does not assess the experimental validation of this technique in isolation. What we document is the grounding of its source school (Classical rhetoric): documented school. Full detail is in the "At a glance" section of this page.

Practise with AI

Three ready-to-use prompts

Copy, paste into your assistant, replace the [brackets]. Works with ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Mistral, Perplexity.

Prepare

Build your plan before the meeting

You are an expert negotiation coach. Help me prepare to use the "Preterition" technique in the following situation: [describe your situation]. Give me: the conditions for success, a 3-step script, my counterpart's likely objections and how to answer them.

ChatGPT Claude Perplexity

Simulate

Rehearse against an AI counterpart

Play the role of my counterpart in a negotiation. I am going to test the "Preterition" technique. React realistically and with resistance, do not give in too quickly, then at the end analyse my performance and suggest 3 concrete improvements.

ChatGPT Claude Perplexity

Debrief

Analyse a past negotiation

Here is how my negotiation went: [paste the exchanges]. Analyse whether the "Preterition" technique was used well, what worked, the mistakes made, and spell out precisely what I could have done better.

ChatGPT Claude Perplexity

References

Bibliography & credible sources

Founding works of the 📜 Classical rhetoric school this technique belongs to.

  • Cover: You Can Negotiate Anything

    You Can Negotiate Anything

    Book

    H. Cohen · 1980

    The best-seller that democratised negotiation: everything is negotiable, provided you understand power, time and information. Accessible in tone and full of everyday examples.

  • Cover: Everything is Negotiable

    Everything is Negotiable

    Book

    G. Kennedy · 1982

    A practical guide to negotiating in daily life as in business, centred on conditional exchange and firmness on your interests. Kennedy hunts down the negotiator's "soft" reflexes.

Aristotle ("Rhetoric"), Quintilian; C. Perelman & L. Olbrechts-Tyteca, "The New Rhetoric", 1958; A. Schopenhauer, "The Art of Being Right".

On video

See the technique in action

Videos to picture Preterition and anchor it through examples.

Search for videos Examples & demonstrations

A verified video selection is being enriched; the search above already surfaces the best videos on the topic.

Technique map

Where this technique sits

Every technique sits within a network: what it draws on, what it combines with, where it applies, and how to defend against it.

Levers engaged

biases & emotions

Fields of application

Sales negotiation Procurement negotiation Labour negotiation Crisis management Political negotiation Real-estate negotiation Cross-cultural negotiation Family negotiation

Countered by

Spot its signals, neutralise it and turn it around with the defensive playbook on this page.

See the counter-techniques

Key takeaways

  • En une phrase

    Preterition consists in declaring that one will pass over a matter in silence, while stating it in the very same breath ("I shall not speak of..."). In negotiation, it serves to make an argument heard while absolving oneself of having advanced it, placing the opponent in the position of being unable to hit back without acknowledging the very point you claim to be leaving unsaid.

  • The right reflex

    Send the question back to its author to regain the initiative.

  • Never do this

    Answering on the terms imposed by the other side.

6.3/10 tactical potential Moderate vigilance Documented school

Master this technique in real situations?

Our programmes turn theory into a concrete advantage.

Explore our programmes
← Technique n°227 Paralipsis Technique n°230 → The Rhetorical Concession (concessio)

Related techniques

The full library →
227 Paralipsis 230 The Rhetorical Concession (concessio) 226 The Pratfall Effect 225 The Zeigarnik Effect
Call Book a call