Redundant Phrasing

Redundant phrasing is a form of repetition, but unlike repetition, redundant phrasing is almost always a sign of weak writing and should be eliminated. These phrases either restate what has already been said or include information that is already part of the definition of the previous word(s). For example:

She nodded her head.

He quickly dashed away.

The head is the only part of the body that can nod, and it is impossible to dash slowly. These additional words are not adding anything to the reader experience; they are simply adding clutter. The following give the reader exactly the same information with fewer words:

She nodded.

He dashed away.

This type of redundant phrasing is the easiest to correct as it simply requires deleting the extra words. Doing so streamlines the prose and improves the pace of the writing. Pay close attention to adverbs, as they are the most common culprit of this type of redundant phrasing.

Redundant phrasing can also repeat what has just been stated:

He stopped moving, freezing where he was.

She crossed the finish line successfully.

I've seen it many times in the past.

All of these examples give the reader the same information in multiple ways.

• The first sentence contains the same information three times. Freezing is the same as stopping and not moving. It also includes information that is implied. It is not possible to stop/freeze anywhere other than where you currently are.

• The second doubles down on the basic information of the sentence. If she crossed the finish line, then by definition she was successful.

• The third adds information that is implied by the main clause of the sentence. If this is something I have seen before, then given that we experience time linearly, these things must have been seen in the past.

The following changes make these sentences more direct and avoid repetition:

He stopped. OR He froze.

She crossed the finish line.

I've seen it many times.

However, unlike the first set of examples where the redundancies are completely unnecessary, a case can be made to keep them for style or emphasis.

• "where he was" can amplify the feeling of status or the abruptness of the lack of movement.

• "successfully" can emphasize the accomplishment of completing the race. This could be important if the character has struggled to complete the race previously.

• "in the past" draws attention away from the narrative present and gives the reader an arrow that points them to past events. This can be useful at the start of a time shift.

In these types of cases, redundancies can work, but make sure they are done with intention.

A third type of redundancy falls under telling, not showing, also called overwriting. This is where the thoughts/feelings of a character are clear from their actions, but the author doesn't trust the reader to infer these, so they state the feelings outright:

The hair on the back of their neck rose in alarm.

She stomped her foot and screamed in frustration.

In both of these cases, the character's feelings are clear from their actions and don't need to be explicitly stated:

The hair on the back of their neck rose.

She stomped her foot and screamed.

Sometimes it might be necessary to include the feeling with the action if the feeling is not what is commonly associated with the action:

The hair on the back of their neck rose in anticipation.

She stomped her foot and screamed in ecstasy.

In these cases, because expectations are being subverted, the "telling" becomes necessary for comprehension.

Redundant Phrasing and Dialogue

One of the most common places to find redundant phrasing is within dialogue and the tags/beats. Because the dialogue tag and the content of the dialogue are often seen as separate, it can be easy to double up on meaning within the two parts:

"I d-d-don't w-w-want to," she stuttered.

"You need to behave." He wagged his finger as he lectured us.

In the first example, the stutter is clear from how the dialogue is written, so the specific speech tag, stuttered, is redundant. If the stutter isn't shown in the speech, then stuttered is an option. In the second example, it is clear the characters are being lectured by the tone and the content of the dialogue along with the action beat "he wagged his finger." This is also an example of the redundant use of an action beat and a dialogue tag. When the beat makes the speaker clear, the tag is not needed.

Redundant phrasing is also commonly seen when an adverb is attached to a dialogue tag:

"I hate you," she screamed loudly.

"I need to tell you something," he whispered quietly.

This is a return to the very first example. In both of the above cases, the adverbs are doubling down on the definition of the speech verb.

The final redundancy within dialogue is a speech/summary:

Adrian didn’t know what to say. So he said, “I don’t know.”

In these cases, the dialogue is both on the page and summarized. This should never happen back-to-back. For dialogue that appears in full, the summaries should be saved for a later point in the narrative where the reader needs a reminder or the character is passing the information on to another.

Redundant Phrases and Speculative Fiction

Considerations for redundant phrasing become a little different when dealing with speculative fiction because anything is possible. Since the rules of our reality don't have to apply, a redundant phrase like:

Its teeth clicked together in its mouth

might no longer be redundant if the creature in question also has teeth on its eyelids or tail. In this case, it is necessary to specify which teeth are clicking together since there is more than one option.

However, the fact that this kind of clarification can be necessary within speculative fiction means that it is even more important to be careful with phrasing when writing fantasy and science fiction, especially when there is a possibility of eye teeth. In these cases, including the qualifier "in their mouth" might confuse the reader and make them think the creature has teeth elsewhere on its body, even if this isn't the case. Because if it needs to be specified, then the implication is that there are other teeth to be considered.