I've been thinking heavily about diction lately. I don't think it's only the choice of words themselves, but of genre, sentence structure, every choice an author or speaker makes in order to transmit not only the semantic import of any utterance, but more importantly the attitude, the emotional subtext of a communication. So diction includes connotations, associations, figures of speech or their complete absence. Diction is all the choices one makes- should I write a letter, shout out my window,deliver a speech, text message, write an editorial or a novel. What form of genre, sentences, style level (high, middle or low style)—all the decisions and selections any speaker or writer makes to accomplish the goal they feel in their gut. Everyone says "get the message across" as though we are all trying to drag logs over the Rubicon. Across what? The space between my skull and yours? How do I get what is in this skull and heart into your skull and heart? We have language principally, and language is imperfect. So we manipulate it to the best of our ability. And, as we know, some people have a way with words; others not have way.
Hegelian dialectic, usually presented in a threefold manner, was stated by Heinrich Moritz Chalybäus  as comprising three dialectical stages of development: a thesis , giving rise to its reaction, an antithesis , which contradicts or negates the thesis, and the tension between the two being resolved by means of a synthesis . In more simplistic terms, one can consider it thus; problem → reaction → solution. Although this model is often named after Hegel, he himself never used that specific formulation. Hegel ascribed that terminology to Kant.  Carrying on Kant's work, Fichte greatly elaborated on the synthesis model, and popularized it.