Redundant vs Repetitive

      4 Comments on Redundant vs Repetitive
Spread the love

Redundant does not mean repetitive. People sometimes get confused because the ‘re’ in redundant suggests repetition. In fact, the word has a totally unrelated meaning. Redundant means unnecessary or superfluous.

Many parts became redundant when we converted to the new equipment.

The word can also be used to refer to components in a system placed there as back-up equipment.

The shuttle’s auxiliary power unit has built-in redundancy to protect the crew in the event of failure.

Further, when something is repetitive it is redundant. But just because something is redundant does not mean it is repetitive. Get it?

(UPDATE: See the comment below and my reply. My point of this post was to distinguish between the two terms. I see Mary’s point, though, and accept that other examples may exist.)

If you found value in this post, could you do me a favor and share it with others? You may use any of the links below. Feel free to comment, as well. To contact me, send an email.

Tom Fuszard, content writer, blog writing, pr writing, web copy

 

 

Follow me on Twitter.
Follow my Facebook page. (May need to log in.)
Connect with me on LinkedIn.

4 thoughts on “Redundant vs Repetitive

  1. Tom Fuszard Post author

    Interesting thought, Mary. In that case, the extra ‘yeahs’ are needed. I imagine there are other examples outside of the creative field. I see your point. Thanks for stopping by.

  2. MC

    Actually, something that is repetitive is not necessarily redundant. If you take a famous lyric for example – “She loves you yeah, yeah, yeah…” – it’s repetitive but not redundant. It just wouldn’t work with one “yeah.” 🙂

  3. Tom Fuszard Post author

    I’m glad to see that my posts are helpful to you. My user name on Twitter is @TomFuszard. I use a plugin that tweets old posts, so you’ll see several listed each day.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*