KudoZ home » English » Social Science, Sociology, Ethics, etc.

A question about redundancy

English translation: not redundant

Login or register (free and only takes a few minutes) to participate in this question.

You will also have access to many other tools and opportunities designed for those who have language-related jobs
(or are passionate about them). Participation is free and the site has a strict confidentiality policy.
14:02 Oct 24, 2004
English to English translations [PRO]
Bus/Financial - Social Science, Sociology, Ethics, etc. / organization of the firm
English term or phrase: A question about redundancy
You can correct the system or change the people, or you can do both, but you cannot simply shut close your eyes and expect the problem to go away. Changing the system is, of course, the more difficult route and requires a strong, open-minded leadership free of petty jealousies, regional prejudices, and parochial notions about the world should be, but is not.

In particular I am concerned about the phrases "petty jealousies", "regional prejudices", and "parochial notions" utilised as a group.

If more context is required, by all means ....
R. A. Stegemann
Saudi Arabia
Local time: 01:34
English translation:not redundant
Explanation:
IMHO, these are not redundant, although certainly related.

Mike :)

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 7 mins (2004-10-24 14:10:07 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

If we just look at the adjectives, \"petty, regional, parochial\" we can certainly see some important differences: \"insignificant, trial, inconsequential, etc.\" versus \"provincial, local, etc.\" versus \"small-town, limited, restricted\".

Granted, there is some redundancy, particularly between \"regional\" and \"parochial\", but language is always redundant to cover the different nuances, etc.
Selected response from:

Michael Powers (PhD)
United States
Local time: 11:34
Grading comment
This was a difficult question to grade, as both time and content had to be weighed. Although Marian provided more content and received more support, Michael was first with a direct answer to my question. Also, I found both Ruth's and Susan's comments to be especially helpful.

With regard to the words "shut", "close", "how", and"'what "I am rather indifferent between the words "shut" and "close", but prefer "how" over "what" in this context, as the word "how" appears to indicate circumstance better than does "what".

I am not sure why Zaphod finds the passage wordy and the author in love with his own pen, but I do agree that the preposition "from" is probably more appropriate here.

Hamo
4 KudoZ points were awarded for this answer



Summary of answers provided
5 +14the phrases you cite are not at all redundant and fit fine together
Marian Greenfield
4 +7not redundant
Michael Powers (PhD)
5Wordy and poorly written, but not really redundant.
zaphod
3about WHAT the world...
Trada inc.


  

Answers


4 mins   confidence: Answerer confidence 5/5 peer agreement (net): +14
a question about redundancy
the phrases you cite are not at all redundant and fit fine together


Explanation:
you do have an extraneous word (shut) and are probably missing a word (about HOW the world should be), but otherwise you're fine...

Marian Greenfield
Local time: 11:34
Native speaker of: Native in EnglishEnglish

Peer comments on this answer (and responses from the answerer)
agree  NancyLynn
3 mins
  -> tks..

agree  vixen: Yes, only the word 'shut' should be left out and 'how' inserted.
4 mins
  -> tks...

agree  Jörgen Slet
6 mins
  -> tks...

agree  Olga B
16 mins
  -> tks...

agree  Ian M-H
22 mins
  -> tks...

agree  Hacene
26 mins
  -> tks...

agree  Java Cafe
1 hr
  -> tks...

agree  nlingua: you caught the right word
1 hr
  -> tks...

agree  Refugio: Also, a group of three interrelated terms with parallel structure (adjective, noun) is often chosen for stylistic effect. (And yes, agree that the missing word is likely how rather than what)
2 hrs
  -> thanks... very good point.

agree  xxxElena Sgarbo: Hi Marian! Great job in Toronto, I hear :-)
6 hrs
  -> Thank you, thank you... It was a great time...

agree  Asghar Bhatti
10 hrs

agree  chopra_2002
20 hrs

agree  Deborah Workman: I agree with you and also with vixen and Ruth.
1 day 14 hrs

agree  Eva Olsson
4 days
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade)

3 mins   confidence: Answerer confidence 4/5Answerer confidence 4/5 peer agreement (net): +7
a question about redundancy
not redundant


Explanation:
IMHO, these are not redundant, although certainly related.

Mike :)

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 7 mins (2004-10-24 14:10:07 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

If we just look at the adjectives, \"petty, regional, parochial\" we can certainly see some important differences: \"insignificant, trial, inconsequential, etc.\" versus \"provincial, local, etc.\" versus \"small-town, limited, restricted\".

Granted, there is some redundancy, particularly between \"regional\" and \"parochial\", but language is always redundant to cover the different nuances, etc.

Michael Powers (PhD)
United States
Local time: 11:34
Native speaker of: Native in EnglishEnglish
PRO pts in category: 25
Grading comment
This was a difficult question to grade, as both time and content had to be weighed. Although Marian provided more content and received more support, Michael was first with a direct answer to my question. Also, I found both Ruth's and Susan's comments to be especially helpful.

With regard to the words "shut", "close", "how", and"'what "I am rather indifferent between the words "shut" and "close", but prefer "how" over "what" in this context, as the word "how" appears to indicate circumstance better than does "what".

I am not sure why Zaphod finds the passage wordy and the author in love with his own pen, but I do agree that the preposition "from" is probably more appropriate here.

Hamo

Peer comments on this answer (and responses from the answerer)
agree  Vicky Papaprodromou
4 mins
  -> Thank you, Vicky - Mike :)

agree  Peter Linton
7 mins
  -> Thank you, Peter - Mike :)

agree  Jörgen Slet
8 mins
  -> Thank you, Jörgen - Mike :)

agree  Olga B
18 mins
  -> Thank you, Olga - Mike :)

agree  Cormac Bracken
25 mins
  -> Thank you, Cormac - Mike :)

agree  Java Cafe
1 hr

agree  humbird: Let's face it, those are ("petty, regional, parochial" ) stuff we cannot avoid in a group setting. They are all there. Thereby no redundancy.
5 hrs
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade)

14 mins   confidence: Answerer confidence 3/5Answerer confidence 3/5
REMARK; notions about the world should be, but is not
about WHAT the world...


Explanation:
missing word

Trada inc.
Canada
Native speaker of: Native in FrenchFrench
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade)

2 hrs   confidence: Answerer confidence 5/5
Wordy and poorly written, but not really redundant.


Explanation:
although a case could be made between "Petty Jealousies", and "Parochial notions". Who ever wrote this is following the 3 reason rule and, IMHO, is more in love with his pen than the concept being expressed. Presumably he is trying to say: "...leadership free FROM petty jealousies, regional prejudices, and parochial notions about WHAT the world should be, but is not."



zaphod
Local time: 17:34
Native speaker of: Native in EnglishEnglish, Native in FrenchFrench
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade)




Return to KudoZ list


KudoZ™ translation help
The KudoZ network provides a framework for translators and others to assist each other with translations or explanations of terms and short phrases.



See also:



Term search
  • All of ProZ.com
  • Term search
  • Jobs
  • Forums
  • Multiple search