By saying destruction ‘exercise,’ you are simply entertaining redundancy
Good LUCKY? We suspect the artist in Masasi, Mtwara Region, who painted this shop name was commissioned to write Good LUCK. And, as if messing English wasn’t bad enough, he messed Kiswahili too by painting Duka LA Muhimu instead of, simply, DUKA MUHIMU. Trust Signwriters! PHOTO | TEUNA S.
We’ll skip our usual tutorial blah-blah and move straight to this column’s cardinal sharing linguistic gems we picked up over the past week. So, here we go…
The Friday, February 6 edition of Bongo’s huge and colourful broadsheet has a story on Page 5 entitled, ‘Authorities destroy 3.5 acres of cannabis farm hidden within maize field.’ It goes thus:
“Geita District Defence and Security Committee, in collaboration with Tanzania Forest Services, has destroyed a 3.5-acre cannabis farm...The destruction EXERCISE took place on Wednesday…
Hello; we don’t need to qualify the noun “destruction” with “exercise” because the act of destroying is nothing other than an exercise! It means, saying “destruction exercise” is to indulge in tautology, that is, adding to a word or a phrase a description that doesn’t add value to what you’ve already said.
In Para 5, reporting on what a senior conservator said, our scribbling colleague writes: “He added that one suspect is currently in CUSTODY WITH security authorities pending legal action AND WILL LATER BE TAKEN TO COURT.”
In custody with security authorities? Nope! We say, more aptly: “In THE custody OF security authorities…” Then, there’s a blatant redundancy case in the writer’s reportage. Why, having said “pending legal action” there’s no need to further say, “…and later be taken to court,” because legal action includes that too. Talk of providing unnecessary information!
On Page 8, there’s an opinion article whose heading is, ‘It still pays for experts and lay persons to
cross-fertilise ideas and experience.’ Therein the scribbler writes in his intro:
“Theorising CAN BE PROVE enjoyable, even draw applause, particularly when it’s done as part of an academic exercise.”
It’s hard to decipher what the opinion scribbler is trying to say, but, we aver, he meant this: “Theorising CAN PROVE enjoyable AND even draw applause, particularly when it’s done as part of an academic exercise.” Towards the end of his enlightening piece, the scribbler writes: “Even worse news, according to ActionAid: Food security would likely deteriorate in Africa to the point that nearly half of the continent’s population would be going without enough food not so many years LATER.”
We’ll avoid any analytical fuss and simply do a partial rewrite: “…nearly half of the continent’s population would be going without enough food not so many years FROM NOW.”
There’s another piece on the same page entitled, ‘Disconnect of college education, social prestige eating morale of studying.’ Comparing the situation of yesteryear’s elite with today’s, our scribbling colleague writes: “The situation is WORLDS DIFFERENT now, 60-plus years later…” Duh! We’re familiar of the expression, “…this and that are worlds APART,” meaning the difference between the (two) mentioned things is quite huge. We’d like to hazard that the scribbler meant to say, “The situation today is WORLDS APART FROM WHAT IT WAS 60-plus years ago.”
The scribbler says further in the last paragraph: “There is a SORT of merry go round of SORTS as to what is happening among our children and youth…” Critique that for yourself, dear reader.
Finally, let’s see what’s is on offer courtesy of Bongo’s senior-most broadsheet of February 7, whose Page 7 is carrying a story entitled, ‘Ministry backs local innovators to boost farm mechanisation.’ In this one, the scribbler reports:
“The Deputy Permanent Secretary …Engineer AK, said prioritising homegrown innovations is central to simplifying farming ACTIVITIES and increasing productivity.”
Now since we dismiss redundant use of the qualifier “exercise,” we wish to counsel here too, that since “farming,” by its very nature entails activities, so we should be contented by just saying “farming,” and not farming activities.
