[lit-ideas] pleonastic,translated as redundant
- From: Eric Yost <mr.eric.yost@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2008 02:40:53 -0500
David: Do carry on.
I just wrote to someone: "For the time being it's on
the back burner."
Was that a redundant sentence?
Full disclosure: the complete text of my message was:
"For the time being it's on the back burner. (Is that a
redundant sentence?)"
Does my calling attention to its redundancy make the
sentence even more redundant? And in the meta-narrative
of this post, asking this very question, am I further
increasing the redundancy of that sentence?
Are there degrees of redundancy? Can one statement be
more tautological than another tautological statement?
Is the phrase "listening-type music" more or less
redundant than the abstract "A=A when A=A"?
Is the notion of the self the ultimate redundancy?
And what's this curious sense of a relation between
redundancy and repetition?
Where would any art be without repetition? No first
movement of Beethoven's Pastoral Symphony. No series of
Rembrandt self-portraits. No villanelles, refrains, or
sestinas. Forget all those Rodin Balzacs. Just a bunch
of rude and impatient people demanding something new
... but only once.
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
