====== Syntactic ambiguity ======
An [[ambiguity:index|ambiguous]] wording in a statement that can lead to misconceptions (and subsequently to false conclusions).
For example, consider the following [[glossary:syllogism|syllogism]] [[app>#barbara|Open this example in Syllogism Finder app]]:
> Cars pollute the air.
> All electric cars are //cars//.
> From this follows: Electric cars pollute the air.
Although each premise appears to be //true// and on first glance, this appears to be a formally correct [[logic:inferences:modus_barbara:index|Modus Barbara]] [[app>#barbara|Show in Syllogism-Finder App]], the conclusion is obviously //false//. The problem lies in the ambiguous wording of the major (first) premise. More information about this in the description below.
===== Other names =====
* Fallacy of [[glossary:equivocation:amphiboly|amphiboly]]
* Structural ambiguity
===== Description =====
If a statement is formulated in a way that it can be interpreted in multiple ways, this can lead to misconceptions about the validity of the statement.
In the example above, the major clause is an [[glossary:equivocation:amphibole|amphibole]] of the form of a [[ambiguity:syntactic:generic_generalization|generic generalization]], which can be interpreted both //distributively// (i.e. as a [[glossary:universal_quantification|universal statement]], in the sense of "//all// cars pollute the air"), as well as //collectively// (i.e. as an [[glossary:existential_quantification|existential statement]], as if stated in the form: "//some// cars pollute the air").
If we assume the latter ("//some// cars pollute the air"), the premise would clearly be true, but the syllogism is then invalid, as the middle term is not distributed from an existential statement ([[logic:formal_fallacies:fallacies_of_distribution:undistributed_middle|undistributed middle term]]). In the former case ("//all// cars pollute the air"), the form is correct, but the premise is then clearly false - since "all cars" would also include electric cars, which at least do not directly emit pollutants - and from a false premise we can’t get a true conclusion.
==== Distinction ====
This fallacy is also known as the "fallacy of amphiboly". An [[rhetoric:glossary:equivokation:amphiboly|amphiboly]] is an ambiguity in the grammatical structure, which in this case leads to a //fallacy of ambiguity//.
Although //amphibolies// are also forms of [[rhetoric:glossary:equivokation:index|equivocations]], the latter term is broader and includes, above all, [[wp>Polysemy|polysemies]], i.e. words and expressions that have multiple extensions. The fallacies that result from such equivocations are described under “[[logic:formal_fallacies:four-term_fallacy:index|Four-Term Fallacy]]” and in related articles.
===== See also =====
* [[glossary:equivocation:index|Equivokation]]
* [[glossary:equivocation:amphiboly|Amphiboly]]
* [[ambiguity:syntactic:generic_generalization|Generic generalization]]
===== More information =====
* [[wp>Syntactic ambiguity]] on //Wikipedia//