Striking the Surplus from Tautologies (Follow-Up 2)
The Blue Book of Grammar and Punctuation
Striking the Surplus from Tautologies (Follow-Up 2)
In response to comments from our readers, last week we revisited our late April newsletter article on tautologies by re-examining vast majority. Today, we’ll conclude our review by looking more closely at two more terms:
Contested Tautology #2: Identical Match
This noun phrase presents a similar issue to that raised among readers for vast majority. The question lies in whether we need a modifier to establish the degree of the noun for clarity—in particular, a partial match as opposed to an identical match.
Here we find another case where spoken idiom intrudes on careful, accurate writing. In speech, we all understand the speaker’s intent behind phrases such as a partial or an identical match. For instance, the distinction can enhance understanding in contexts involving forensic evidence (a partial fingerprint match).
For the word match, we’ll once again consider common definitions from popular sources:
[dictionary.com]
1. a person or thing that equals or resembles another in some respect.
3. a person or thing that is an exact counterpart of another.
[Merriam-Webster]
1a: a person or thing equal to or similar to another
1c: an exact counterpart
Another useful website for word definitions, ninjawords.com, offers this:
“Someone [or something] with a measure of an attribute equaling or exceeding the object of comparison.”
We concede that a partial vs. an identical match can add clarity through speech. We also maintain our stance that writing affords more time and thought to be specific to the reader’s benefit.
Using the definitions provided as our points of reference, we wouldn’t want to pair the concept of partial with the defined exact (also a synonym of identical), nor would we want to combine it with the idea of equaling or exceeding.
Even the more elastic definitions (dictionary.com 1 and Merriam-Webster 1a) discount the idea of partial by allowing space for a simple resemblance or similarity, making a partial match still a match.
As we did for vast majority last week, we recommend that writers who still wish to use partial or identical match be specific in how the match is so. Otherwise, English offers other words and phrases for delivering the idea—e.g., replace partial match with resemblance or similarity; replace identical match with just identical or the same.
Contested Tautology #3: Invited Guest
A few of our readers also pointed out that a person can be a guest without being invited, such as at a restaurant or a hotel. This in turn would negate invited guest as a tautology.
Here once more we adjust our position by expanding it. We accept that a guest can be other than invited at a place of hospitality or entertainment (although with today’s aggressive marketing through multiple channels, even the question of invitation can remain open). We also believe that guest in this context is used to achieve professional formality; more accurate words in principle would be patron or customer.
If on the other hand the guest in question is one who visits a home, event, or function by invitation, the noun and its modifier would be redundant and therefore a tautology.
Thanks again to all of you who reviewed, considered, and responded to this topic. Together, we make a strong team of advocates for clear, precise, and grammatical communication—i.e., iron sharpening iron. We look forward to more exchanges with you!
If the article or the existing discussions do not address a thought or question you have on the subject, please use the "Comment" box at the bottom of this page.
This discussion of “invited guest” brings up a problem I have long had with stores and restaurants calling me a guest: I feel that if I were a true guest, I would not be asked to pay!
The following suggestion was made regarding the replacement of “identical match”: “….. replace identical match with just identical or perhaps EXACTLY THE SAME .” That would be redundant, as “exact” and “same” mean the same thing. If it’s not exact, then it’s not the same – similar, but not same.
We agree and have made the change. Thanks for your observation.
I am wondering about “upcoming.” What is wrong with “coming?”
To us, upcoming is less a tautology and more a case of an extra particle that can sometimes be clipped away. For instance, compare “The upcoming concert is sold out” with “The coming concert is sold out.” We would argue that the former more conveys a sense of time and the latter a sense of movement.
Love Grammar Book’s comments about the grammar and misspelling of words by the news networks. Not only are the news networks at fault, but prime time TV. I was looking at an episode of Survivor’s Remorse and one of the actors said, “I wish I hadn’t CAME.” ugghhh I cringed!
We’ve become too lackadaisical in almost everything we do!
This is unrelated to tautologies, but you broke your rule about using a hyphen after re when you wrote “re-examining” in this post. That’s confusing!
Our Rule 3 of Hyphens with Prefixes and Suffixes says, “For clarity, many writers hyphenate prefixes ending in a vowel when the root word begins with the same letter.” Most dictionaries accept either spelling as correct.
REACHING OUT (CAN YOU REACH IN?)
BEST CASE SCENARIO (TAUTOLOGY)
THIS MOMENT IN TIME (TAUTOLOGY)
IN THE MONTH OF XXXXX (PLEONISM) THE NAME OF THE MONTH IS THE MONTH
IDENTICAL MATCH (TAUTOLOGY, THERE ARE NO UN-IDENTICAL MATCHES)
INVITED GUEST (TAUTOLOGY, ALL GUESTS ARE INVITED)
UPCOMING (UP IS AN EXTRA PARTICLE, THERE ARE NO DOWNCOMING EVENTS)
THE MAIN ESSENCE (THE ESSENCE OF A MATTER IS SINGULAR, MORE WOULD NOT BE AN ESSENCE)