3 of 3
3
Bad writing award winners
Posted: 11 August 2011 08:00 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 31 ]
Moderator
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1403
Joined  2007-04-28

There is an interesting wikipedia entry under pleonasm which addresses prolixity too.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 12 August 2011 03:58 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 32 ]
Moderator
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1509
Joined  2007-02-14

To save y’all from having to scroll and watch simultaneously: Semantic pleonasm

Profile
 
 
Posted: 12 August 2011 06:37 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 33 ]
Moderator
Rank
Total Posts:  14
Joined  2011-07-20

I had toyed with the idea of introducing pleonasticism (which is my neologism of the day), but decided against, for various reasons.

The examples of prolixity, however, are rather poor - some of them fit quite neatly into the original suggestion that sometimes more is more - they are on occasion a question of style, and even if they do introduce strictly unnecessary information, it may not be unwelcome.

When push comes to shove, I’d plump for the Oxford Dictionarians over the wikipedians any day of the week.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 12 August 2011 03:52 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 34 ]
Moderator
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  653
Joined  2011-04-10

Hmm… “pleognosticism” has a nice teleological ring to it…

Profile
 
 
   
3 of 3
3
 
‹‹ HD: Mere Words      Made-up words ››