CAMPBELL, George. The Philosophy of Rhetoric. London: V. Strahan and T. Cadell, 1776. Impreso.
[v. 1, p. 38] I come now to consider that species of double meaning which ariseth, not from the use of equivocal terms, but solely from the construction, and which I therefore distinguish by the name of ambiguity. This, of all the faults against perspicuity, it is in all languages the most difficult to avoid. There is not one of the parts of speech, which may not be placed as that, agreeably to the rules of grammar, it may be construed with different parts of the sentence, and, by consequence, made to exhibit different senses. Besides, a writing intent upon his subject is less apt to advert to those imperfections in his style, which occasion ambiguity than to any other. As no term or phrase he employs doth of itself suggest the false meaning, a manner of construing his wording different from that which is expressive of his sentiment will not so readily occur to his thoughts; and yet this erroneous manner of construing them may be the most obvious to the reader. I shall give examples of ambiguities in most of the parts of speech, beginning with the pronouns.
BLAIR, Hugh. Lectures on Rhetoric and Belles Lettres. 1785. Ed. de Linda Ferreira-Buckley and S. Michael Halloram. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 2005.
Blair, Hugo. Lecciones sobre la retórica y las bellas letras. Trad. José Luis Munarriz. Madrid: Ibarra, 1817, 3ª ed.
Blair. (Ed. de Linda Ferreira-Buckley and S. Michael Halloram) 2005
[p. 111] Ambiguity arises from two causes: either from a wrong choice of words, or a wrong collocation of them.
Blair (trad. Munarriz, 273)
De dos causas nace la ambigüedad: de la mala elección de las palabras, ó de su mala colocación.