Denny’s restaurant serves $3.99 and $4.99 deals where you can get about three pancakes, two scrambled eggs, a hash brown, and your choice of two types of meats, typically bacon and sausage. These meals are great. They taste great. They smell great. They look great on the plate. No one debates this. People just eat to their heart’s content.
However, the two meats don’t make much sense. Why is it necessary to have two servings each from the same pork meat group? Why not have bacon and another type of meat? It seems a little unnecessary to have both bacon and sausage. You can get the same experience eating the bacon as you can the sausage, because they are both pork.
Denny’s, along with other restaurants, place the two meats together just as a marketing tool. There is nothing wrong with their marketing strategy. People mostly look at the meat and the number of pancakes before they even think about the eggs. The pancakes and the meat are the selling points and the meat itself catches the eye of customers more than anything else on the plate. However, what happens when you take away just one of the meats? Will the customer not want to buy the special? No. They will still buy the special.
It doesn’t matter one way or another to the customer if Denny’s takes away one of the meats. The customer might be mad if the restaurant removed both meats from the menu. The point I am trying to make about the two meats is that both have the same value. One just looks and cooks differently from the other, but they both come from the same family group of meats. However, you only need one of the types to sustain you, to meet your overall meat intake. You don’t really need that much protein in one sitting. Just eating the bacon alone is enough sustenance. Anyway, too much of a thing, especially the parts from the pig, is not a good thing.
The same line of thought applies to the excerpt below. In reference to “primarily” and “in part,” you only need one of the words. They both offer the same value in meaning. You only need one to sustain the overall function (in meaning) of the sentence. Because they are both the same, it is “redundant,” or unnecessary, to place them together in one sentence. In this case, placing both of these phrases together, side by side in the sentence, is similar to placing two verbs of the same tense together: Sarah walks talks today.
Let’s read the excerpt.
|Answering the question of whether or not we should comply with or resist the signification of Christmas as “nigger,” deals primarily in part with Faulkner’s representation of Burch.|
Choose one word. Choose either “primarily” or choose “in part.” They both evoke the same meaning.
With this in mind, develop revision objectives that include references to removing unnecessary phrasing. To your professor, your sentence appears too wordy and you also appear calculating, almost to the point of trying too hard. As a result, your paper results in a less than genuine effort.
For an extended explanation, see also the comment “Phony (Wordy).”
Copyright 2011 Regina Y. Favors. All Rights Reserved.