Sunday, 14 October 2012

Terms and conditions

Isn't 'terms and conditions' unnecessary reduplication? Don't both of those words basically mean the same thing? And talking of which: wouldn't 'reduplication' be better spelled 'redupliduplication'?

Profound and puzzling questions, these.

2 comments:

Ruzz said...

A contract has many terms but only those terms which are conditions of the contract will amount to a breach of the contract allowing the contract to be terminated. If you are entering into a contract you will want to know all the terms, but also which ones amount to conditions.

Archie Valparaiso said...

Legalese evidently and manifestly loves and adores semantic and meaning-related duplication and doubling-up - aid and abet, intents and purposes, null and void, cease and desist....

But it's at its very, absolute, complete, full, entire, total and utter best and optimal when the whole, entire, integral and complete thesaurus is used, deployed or otherwise implemented, as the case may be. In fact, I think, believe, hold, warrant, attest and maintain that legal drafting must traditionally, customarily and in historical practice have been paid and remunerated by the word.