Episode Transcript

Are You Annoyingly Redundant?
Episode 182: August 07, 2009

Grammar Girl here.

In today's episode we’re going to look at, examine, and explore redundancies, tautologies and other superfluous excesses.

But first, today's show is sponsored by Audible, the Internet's leading provider of spoken-word entertainment. For a free trial membership and free audiobook to keep, visit audiblepodcast.com/gg.

We all want to keep our writings as cogent as possible; in part, that means excising needless words – notably redundancies.

Earlier and Later

There’s a particular construction that frequently makes its way into even the best news writing, as well as into press releases and other corporate communications: “later this week,” “earlier this year” and the like. Here’s how and why the “later” and “earlier” are redundant. Consider this sentence:

“I’ll get back to you later this week.” Well, it has to be later this week; it’s in the future. “Later” is implicit. It’s sufficient, when discussing an upcoming event, to say, “I’ll get back to you this week.” 

The same goes for this sentence, dealing with a past event: “She went to Marrakesh earlier this year.”

An exception would be when striking a contrast between two events and the relative chronology is important. Here’s an example: “The senator said in June that he supported the railroad project. “Earlier” this year, he opposed the project.”

Future Plans

A similar redundancy can be found in this sentence: “Let me know what your future plans are.” 

If you’re talking about plans that one has now, they are almost invariably plans for the future. You might modify the word “plans” with the words “immediate” or “long-term” to clarify a timeframe, of course.

If, by chance, you had some plans in the past that didn’t work out, you could toss a “previous” in there, as in, “My previous plans were to become an aerialist, but then I got that inner-ear infection … ”

Past History

We can find a comparable situation with “past history”andpast experience.” Again, when taken in the opposite direction, time-wise, a modifier would be helpful: “We here at Granite Airlines hope your future experience with us will be far more enjoyable. And we do hope that nasty stain comes out of your suit.” Similarly, one need not prepare ahead of time. To prepare is sufficient.

Ten-Year Anniversary

Here’s another doozy: “Happy 10-year anniversary!” The Random House and American Heritage dictionaries trace the origin of “anniversary” to words roughly meaning “the turning of the year.” The root “annus” means year, so it’s fine to go simply with “Happy 10th anniversary!”

That is the opposite problem, of course, of people who insist on marking their “six-week anniversary,” which doesn’t really make sense, even if it is kind of sweet for a new couple.  Awwwwww. Just don’t use it in your writing.

Some verbal excesses aren’t necessarily redundant; they’re just cumbersome.

In the Process Of

One such phrase to excise from your writing is “in the process of,” as in, “My kids are in the process of driving me crazy.” Delete it, and you have, “My kids are driving me crazy.” Anytime you seein the process of,” take it out and check to see whether any meaning is lost. You’ll save your fingers thousands of superfluous keystrokes over a few decades. (Notice we didn’t need to say “a period of a few decades.”)

Extend an Invitation

Recently a writer “extended us an invitation to” a party. Well! It seems “invite” wasn’t enough. That must have been some party. Probably to a 10th anniversary party.

Please RSVP

Oh, as long as we’re discussing invitations, watch out for “please R.S.V.P.” R.S.V.P. stands, of course, for répondez s'il vous plaît and that means “respond, please.” So, “please R.S.V.P.” would mean “please respond, please.” If you're begging, that's fine; but really, it's better to preserve your dignity.

Whether or Not

Another quick way to trim a couple of words at a time from your writing (and your speech) is to keep an eye on the “whether” – the “whether or not,” that is.

I can’t decide whether or not to bring my umbrella. Lose the “or not”in that instance, and you’re fine. Just don’t lose your umbrella.

The Fix

The Quick and Dirty Tip is overarching, yet fairly simple: Think about what every word means; don’t toss in a phrase just because you hear it or see it a lot. Common usage all too frequently is incorrect usage.

The Reason Is Because

Take this example, and you’ll see what we mean: The reason you love grammar is because you love rules.

Well, let's see. The words “reason” and “because” both represent the same idea. The sentence would be just as clear if you leave either of them out. It could read, “The reason you love grammar is that you love rules,” or “You love grammar because you love rules.”

Think about what every word means, and take out the ones that are redundant. It's easy, and it works.

You Can Say That Again

Let’s close with one a familiar term: “reiterate.” “Let me reiterate,” one might say, usually for emphasis. According to many dictionaries, to iterate is to say or do something again or repeatedly. So, “reiterate” would mean to re-repeat your words or actions.

“Reiterate,” of course, has become the more common term. The savvy writer, though, knows that “iterate” works just as well and that knowledge can be useful. For a headline writer, for example, any tactic for trimming characters helps in a tight count.

Audible

Long-time listeners know that we're sponsored by Audible, and you can get a free audiobook to keep when sign up for a new 14-day free trial at audiblepodcast.com/gg. If you're signing up this week, you should check out Money Girl’s 10 Steps for a Debt Free Life by Laura Adams. She has a bunch of great tips; for example, did you know that it is better for your credit score to have your debt spread across several credit cards than to max out just one?  I didn't, and that's just one of her many great tips. In addition to Money Girl’s 10 Steps to a Debt Free Life, Audible has over 50,000 titles for you to choose from, so visit audiblepodcast.com/gg for your free trial and free audiobook download today.

Ragan.com

This podcast was written by Rob Reinalda, executive editor for Ragan Communications (word_czar on Twitter), and I'm Mignon Fogarty, the author of Grammar Girl's Quick and Dirty Tips for Better Writing.

That's all. Thank for listening.


Comments (38) for Are You Annoyingly Redundant? |  Subscribe to Comment

Frank Says:
11/8/2009 12:00:46 PM
My pet peave: "Harbinger of things to come".
Hamish Says:
9/3/2009 10:28:57 AM
First-time visitor to the site and think it's great. Interesting to see that in the podcast (though not in the transcript)you end with "Let’s close with one final familiar term..." Surely one always 'ends' with a 'final' example.
Laura Says:
9/2/2009 3:18:39 AM
My favourite redundant phrase is the one on the end of far too many list titles. These list titles read something like: "50 things to do before you die" or "20 places to see before you die". OK, so what happens after you die is debatable, but surely there's no need to spell out the fact that the writer thinks you should do these things or see these places while you're still alive as opposed to.... while you're an angel/ghost/reincarnated ant?
Daniel Says:
8/28/2009 12:22:40 AM
Cindy, "modify" denotes the relationship between the adjective "future" and the noun "plans." "Modify" does not mean replace, so "immediate," instead of "future," could be used to modify "plans."
Daniel Says:
8/28/2009 12:19:41 AM
Cindy, "modify" denotes the relationship between the adjective "future" and the noun "plans." "Modify" does not mean replace, so "immediate," instead of "future," could be used to modify "plans."
Stephen Smith Says:
8/22/2009 1:53:54 PM
In response to "Janet Says: 8/10/2009 4:59:36 PM" please check out "Origin: 1895–1900; < F r(épondez) s('il) v(ous) p(laît) please respond." (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/rsvp) I feel that putting please before RSVP is redundant, due to the built in meaning of RSVP, (Meaning please respond). This is just one thing that English speakers have to remember.
Chris Says:
8/22/2009 1:08:46 PM
One reason I've enjoyed the GG program is that it presents information about grammar without belittilng those who err or creating class distinctions between those who are careful with grammar and those who are not. However, some guest writters have not seemed as invested in this idea. I could tell this was not written by Ms. Fogerty within the first paragraphs. Although the information is at the usual high standard, the tone borders on snarky. I found myself getting defensive, an emotion I rarely have when listening to this podcast. Thank you for creating this wonderful resource. I submit this minor critique with the upmost respect to you and Mr. Reinalda.
Anne Says:
8/17/2009 5:09:41 AM
How about the eternal legalese of "cease and desist"? That must be one of the most annoying example of tautology around
überRegenbogen Says:
8/15/2009 2:05:09 AM
"Think about what every word means." Thank you! I feel a little less like a weirdo! Ooh. I never realised that iterate meant more than once. I've always thought that an iteration referred to an individual cycle of a potentially repeated process—especially in computer programming (as in an iteration of a loop). Now i have to restructure a corner of my language. D'oh! ("Iteration" sounded so much classier than "cycle". Oh well.) (I embrace sane grammar because i like coherence. I'm not enamoured of rules; they are merely the means to the end. ?)
spudguy Says:
8/13/2009 8:03:51 PM
This may not be a redundancy, but if 'fiction' is something that is not true, then what is 'non-fiction'? Reality?
Ashley Says:
8/13/2009 3:55:04 PM
And then there's "forewarn" ... as opposed to warning someone after the fact?
Lei Says:
8/13/2009 12:25:27 PM
I always cringe when someone says "at this point in time"
Cindy S. Says:
8/13/2009 11:08:38 AM
I have a question about this sentence: "You might modify the word “plans” with the words “immediate” or “long-term” to clarify a timeframe, of course." Should the word "plans" been the word "future"?
Mike L Says:
8/13/2009 7:10:59 AM
I saw a good one in my newspaper today: "The statue will be as high as three double-decker buses, stacked on top of each other" As opposed to it being as high as three buses parked side by side? In that cases, it's two of the buses that would be redundant.
Phil Says:
8/12/2009 8:13:40 PM
RSVP: reserve s'il vous plait- respond IF YOU please. Nuance in French is everything or it is nothing: 'Respond if you want, you silly Englishperson.' Another peeve (why put pet in front of peeve?): unravel. Ravel means to come undone. Unravel means what- to put back together?
Um . . . Says:
8/12/2009 1:20:49 PM
"Reiterate" is a reporting verb. ORIGIN late Middle English (in the sense [do (an action) repeatedly] ): from Latin reiterat- ‘gone over again,’ from the verb reiterare, from re- ‘again’ + iterare ‘do a second time.’
Amanda Says:
8/11/2009 8:13:45 PM
I disagree that phrases such as "later this week" are redundant. If it's Tuesday, and someone says that they'll call "later this week," I know not to expect a call until Thursday at the earliest. If they just said "this week" I would expect the call at any time. Likewise, "earlier this year" might imply a January-March range.
Fred from Long Island Says:
8/11/2009 10:13:02 AM
Thanks for addressing this topic. Time-related redundant expressions are among my pet peeves. Related to this is the expression "at the end of the day" which I don't hear as much as I used to (fortunately).
Ralph Says:
8/11/2009 8:28:29 AM
Based on my experience in the work world, I think that "I'll get back to you later this week" is another way of saying "Don't expect to hear from me today about this topic" and hence isn't really redundant. I love the podcast!
Zuleika D. Says:
8/10/2009 8:14:20 PM
*Surely you meant to write 'provider'?: "But first, today's show is sponsored by Audible, the Internet's leading provide* of spoken-word entertainment. For a free trial membership and free audiobook to keep, visit audiblepodcast.com/gg."
Sandi Says:
8/10/2009 7:48:16 PM
What about "as per"? That's my redundant pet peeve! Am I wrong to be irritated about this?
Margaret Says:
8/10/2009 6:49:36 PM
I had a teacher in primary school who hated the term "all of a sudden". She would cross it out in red biro and write "suddenly" every time someone used it.
Janet Says:
8/10/2009 4:59:36 PM
I don't completely agree with cutting the "Please" from "Please RSVP." While I know what SVP means, I fully expect that many people just take the initialism RSVP to mean the act of letting the host know whether you are attending the event. In essence, it has morphed into a neologism where it no longer is a French initialism meaning please respond. If I wrote RSVP at the end of an invitation with nothing before or after it, people would wonder why I had done that. Just as I would order a "chai tea" which really means "tea tea," I think languages should be flexible enough to allow for international adaptations.
Jana Eggers Says:
8/10/2009 4:39:48 PM
Love the newsletter! One issue on this though, while it made my husband's head hurt when I explained it to him, a "10-year anniversary" is not redundant, but wrong -- just as wrong as a "6-week anniversary". Unless you married one person each year for 10 years, then celebrated a 10-year anniversary each year after that, I think... oh, but that would be redundant. ;-)
alexander Says:
8/10/2009 4:31:20 PM
"close proximity" "free gift"
rpmason Says:
8/10/2009 9:32:52 AM
glpease, also "PIN number" and "hot water heater."
Pascal Says:
8/10/2009 9:30:29 AM
Regarding redunancies you may also check out following blog post: How To Remove Redundant Words And Phrases From Your Writing
glpease Says:
8/10/2009 1:59:15 AM
Great episode. Redundancy is all around us. How many times do we hear things like "ATM machine," or "SAT test?" It drives me just a little crazy, especially when I catch myself doing it. ;)
Karen Says:
8/9/2009 9:42:29 AM
This is my first time visiting this site and I am amazed at the wealth of information contained here. For instance, I tend to use "whether or not" in my writing assignments. I had no idea this phrase was too wordy. I plan on being a regular visitor and look forward to interacting with everyone. I have also enjoyed reading the well-written comments.
N.Rees Says:
8/9/2009 8:54:53 AM
To iterate something is to employ something one or more times (usually more than once). So the first iteration is not a repeat. When you iterate, you are starting from the first time. When you reiterate, there is an assumption that at least one iteration has occurred. Therefore reiterate is more correct when used to describe something that has already been said, in my view.
J.Evan Says:
8/9/2009 5:57:15 AM
If I tell someone I will get back to them later this week, that conveys my intention to get back to the person late in the week. If anything its a misuse of the word later, where late should be used, but it is not redundant. Same goes for earlier.
Asher Says:
8/9/2009 5:20:05 AM
Is there a special term for being redundant across languages, such as "Please RSVP" or "Pita Bread"?
Aleksa Says:
8/8/2009 7:43:49 PM
Iterate and reiterate are for the most part synonyms except that iterate can refer to math procedures and reiterate has the connotation of repetition for emphasis. You are right. This knowledge is useful when one is trying to trim characters. I would guess that the main reason people are redundant and say earlier this year, later this week, etc. is for description. This perhaps is not important for a news writer. However, it is important for a creative writer where description is important.
Metoo Says:
8/8/2009 6:29:21 PM
Enjoyed this one very much. Oh how I love things like '7 am in the morning' and 'tuna fish'....not!!
Nancy Says:
8/7/2009 7:03:16 PM
Whoops...I should watch what I say! To continue my previous message: ...past tense (were) is used, therefore making "previous" unnecessary.
Nancy Says:
8/7/2009 6:59:21 PM
I also believe "my previous plans were to..." is redundant. As long as you're saying "were," past tense is implied.
Cara Says:
8/7/2009 9:42:05 AM
These are great insights for writers. Even the best get caught up in words sometimes. There are just so many words out there and we want to stuff them all into our work! Also... I'm sorry that so many people come to this blog just to critique your grammar, Grammar Girl. Because you're a grammar expert, it probably makes them feel big to find fault with you. But I want to say that I can overlook your little mistakes and really pay attention to the content of your work, which I hope everyone else will do, too!
Sam Says:
8/7/2009 6:41:00 AM
"'Reiterate,' of course, has become the more common term." "Of course," is a somewhat superfluous turn of phrase in this sentence. Also, there is a confusion between single and double inverted commas in this article.

Add Comment

 *
 *
 *
  Image to deter spam submissions
  To deter spam submissions, please type the letters from the image into the box below:
 *
 
  Fields marked with "*" are required