Amphiboly

Amphiboly, in logic and rhetoric, is a fallacy that results from ambiguous sentence structure rather than from ambiguous individual words. A statement is amphibolic when its grammar permits more than one plausible interpretation, so the conclusion drawn depends on how the sentence is parsed.

Common forms of amphiboly arise from attaching modifiers to the wrong noun, misplacing phrases, or otherwise letting syntax govern meaning in an unclear way. Classic examples include sentences like “Visiting relatives can be a nuisance,” which can mean either that relatives who visit are a nuisance or that the act of visiting relatives is a nuisance. Another well-known example is “I shot an elephant in my pajamas,” where it is unclear whether the speaker or the elephant was wearing the pajamas.

Amphiboly is distinct from the fallacy of equivocation. In amphiboly the ambiguity comes from grammar and sentence structure, while in equivocation the ambiguity stems from a single word with multiple senses. Both can produce misleading conclusions, but they originate in different linguistic mechanisms.

Mitigating amphiboly involves clarifying syntax and relationships within the sentence. Methods include rewriting to remove ambiguous attachments, adding explicit modifiers, and using punctuation or shorter sentences to fix interpretation. In rhetoric, law, and everyday communication, careful sentence construction helps ensure the intended meaning is unambiguous.