...as best I can tell, the origin of the phrase is the legal principle that the statement of an exception shows that the rule is opposite in the cases not excepted. Here's what the OED tells us:And from the attendant comment thread:By "the exception confirms the rule," Johnson seems to have meant that "seeing the exception, and recognizing that it is an exception, confirms for us that there is a rule." And my sense is that in the modern day, the phrase -- when used effectively -- has roughly that meaning.The legal maxim, ‘Exception proves (or confirms) the rule in the cases not excepted’ (exceptio probat regulam in casibus non exceptis), which is in its original form an example of sense 1, is commonly quoted as ‘The exception proves the rule’ ....
The example I always use when trying to explain this to people is a sign that says, "No parking from 5 AM-5PM Mon-Fri" -- the rules generally allow parking, except in the periods noted.
from Cicero's Pro Balbo: "Quod si exceptio facit non liceat, ubi non sit exceptum, ibi necesse est licere." My translation: "If an exception makes it impermissible, where there is no exception, it must be permissible."
When the law spells out an exception (here, the time when you may not park next to the post office), it thereby implies the existence of a more general rule to the contrary (here, that at any other time, you may park there).
Why is this important? Because it improves public knowledge of what is permitted. You don't have to define by extension all of the times when it's okay to park; you just have to define the exceptions, which define the rule as a negative space.
We can derive this idea also from Grice's maxims of implicature. If parking were never allowed, then putting up a sign saying "No parking on Wednesday mornings" would be perverse and misleading.
While I agree with the definition "seeing the exception, and recognizing that it is an exception, confirms for us that there is a rule", I'm not too sure your example conveys the spirit of what I take from that.
ReplyDeleteTo me, it's not about using exception to define rules, but recognising that there has always been a pattern/ rule that one has taken for granted only after an exception has been spotted.
For instance, say you have known a whole family all your life -grandparents/ parents/ children. You never noticed anything unusual about them.
Suddenly one of them starts wearing very colourful clothes, which makes you aware for the first time that all the rest of the family _always_ wear nothing but grey.
The exception has proven that there is indeed a rule that has always applied -and still does, apart from that exception.