I
was recently asked to look over a paper which had already been edited
as the author was confused. The editor had written 'tautology –
correct' a number of times throughout the paper and the author did not
really understand. When asked for clarification, the editor simply said
'you've used tautologies, so you should correct them.' Quite apart from
the fact that the editor should have corrected the mistakes, he made no
attempt to offer advice or suggestions. The author was left in the dark
as to what his mistakes were and how to avoid them in the future.
A
tautology is when a writer (or speaker) says the same thing twice,
rendering some of the information redundant. A lot of people commenting
on tautologies tend to offer a list of examples and sound slightly smug
when pointing out how silly one must be to make such a mistake. "A free
gift? Well, it wouldn't be much of a gift if you have to pay for it,
hohoho!" And so on. The problem is, many of these commentators offer
little in the way of advice or address why some of these tautologies
occur.
Let's
begin by looking at 'free gift', as it is possibly the most commonly
quoted tautology. 'Free gift' is a tautology because a gift by its very
nature should be free, therefore 'gift' alone is sufficient. The
problem here is that free gift is used in promotional
copy, obviously, so the tautology actually serves a purpose and – may I
suggest – might not be as incorrect as first appears. If you are given
a gift simply for taking a short survey, no money changes hands and the
goods you receive are indeed free. If, as is often the case, you
receive something as an incentive for subscribing to a magazine or
booking a holiday, the gift may be a bonus, but it is arguably not
'free'. I'm sure many people will disagree with me on this one, but I
am not so quick to judge. The other thing to bear in mind is the effect
that the word 'free' has on consumers. People like getting stuff for
free and are arguably less concerned about grammar, therefore 'free
gift' may be more appealing. It's just a thought. Of course, the best
way to avoid this error if you are involved in writing promotional copy
is to specify the gift, e.g. 'free pen', 'free book', etc. Let's now look at other common tautologies, why they are wrong and how to correct them:
I also like it, too. – Also and too, in this context, mean the same. Use also or too; not both.
PIN
number – The last letter signifies the word used at the end (in this
case 'number'). Other examples include GPS system, SAT test, HIV virus
and ATM machine. For all of them, it is OK to simply use the
abbreviations.
¥100
yen – You do not need the currency sign and the name of the currency.
Use one or the other, but my advice if you are writing online is to use
the name of the currency as some signs may not be readable in all
browsers.
Dot.com – The dot (.) is not needed.
In my opinion, I think that... – They mean the same, so use one or the other.
Joint cooperation – Cooperation means working with other parties, so the joint is redundant.
One after the other in succession – In succession means one after the other, therefore it should be used alone.
4
am in the morning – Very common amongst non-native English speakers who
do not know the meaning of am (ante-meridian – 'before noon'). 'In the
morning' is not needed.
To reiterate again – Reiterate means to say something again, making the use of 'again' redundant.
Close proximity – They mean the same. Close is usually fine in non-technical writing.
Necessary requirement – If something is required, it is necessary. Use one of them.
Today's modern technology – Use modern technology or today's technology – they mean the same.
Some Problematic Tautologies
While
researching this a little further, I found the following examples of
tautologies and I would like to look at them in more detail.
Win
a Free Trip! – This was listed because, the other noted, 'if you are
winning, it is free', but is that really true? I have seen competitions
in which you can win a flight, but not accommodation. In such cases,
the airfare is indeed free, but the trip itself would not be (unless
you just flew to the destination and came straight back). Be careful
when using such language – particularly if writing or editing
promotional copy – and ensure that the meaning is clear.
Top
priority – Naturally a priority should be one's main concern, therefore
this is a tautological phrase. However, in an age of self-help gurus
and 'life hacks', we are constantly being told that we should put
things in order of priority. The result is that phrases such as 'top
priority', 'main priority' and 'first priority' are becoming more and
more common. Should you use them? I would not use them, but perhaps it
is becoming more an issue of preference than grammar.
I also found this on a website:
"Tautologous
expressions are often used in legal documents for clarification of
meaning; such as, "will and testament" and "breaking and entering"."
I
thought that I should address this as I studied law at university and
sometimes edit legal documents and papers. In will and testament, the
two words relate to different things: 'will' relating to the desire to
create the document and 'testament' relating to the act of creating it.
Likewise, 'breaking' relates to the force used in entering a property
whereas 'entering' relates to the trespass element of the crime. There
are other examples in law, including assault and battery. While they do
include expressions to clarify the meaning, they are not really
examples of tautologies.
Hope this helps!
