Is “moreover/further/furthermore/besides/additionally” used together with “also” a redundancy?
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty{ margin-bottom:0;
}
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
I read from The Free Thesaurus that "moreover", "further", "furthermore", "besides", "additionally", as well as "also" are synonyms. So is using one of those words along with an "also" in a style exemplified as follows a redundancy?
My hometown is a deplorable place for it is so urbanized a concrete jungle that even access to a tiny piece of the natural scene therein is desperate, and moreover, the cost of living therein is also so exorbitant that one usually has to have a very highly paid job to reach decent material condition.
Should either "moreover" or "also" be removed?
On the other hand, I see, in Oxford Dictionaries, an example:
The university itself, moreover, is also unable to launch a serious
defence of the proposed centre.
Therein "moreover" and "also" are used together.
Therefore I wonder whether it is proper to use one of the enumerated words together with "also".
redundancy
asked May 9 at 17:22
Captain Bohemian
265
bumped to the homepage by Community♦ 34 mins ago
This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed.
|
show 13 more comments
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
I read from The Free Thesaurus that "moreover", "further", "furthermore", "besides", "additionally", as well as "also" are synonyms. So is using one of those words along with an "also" in a style exemplified as follows a redundancy?
My hometown is a deplorable place for it is so urbanized a concrete jungle that even access to a tiny piece of the natural scene therein is desperate, and moreover, the cost of living therein is also so exorbitant that one usually has to have a very highly paid job to reach decent material condition.
Should either "moreover" or "also" be removed?
On the other hand, I see, in Oxford Dictionaries, an example:
The university itself, moreover, is also unable to launch a serious
defence of the proposed centre.
Therein "moreover" and "also" are used together.
Therefore I wonder whether it is proper to use one of the enumerated words together with "also".
redundancy
asked May 9 at 17:22
Captain Bohemian
265
bumped to the homepage by Community♦ 34 mins ago
This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed.
Your quoted sentence, to me, is unclear. The section, 'it is so urbanised a concrete jungle that even...', seems like a fragment was inserted in the sentence. Similarly, I think there is a missing article before 'decent material condition'.
– ifly6
May 9 at 17:50
@ifly6 I know that quote misses some pretexts, but as you can check from that link, all examples in that dictionary are that way, so you can only interpret them based on your imagination. Then, I don't know what you mean by "a fragment was inserted in the sentence"; I just use that section to elaborate why my hometown is a deplorable place. I actually just make a plain example, which is, nevertheless, real, of a style I often wish to use in my real writing, which is in scientific contexts.
– Captain Bohemian
May 9 at 18:57
@ifly6 I am not sure if an article should be placed prior to "condition" here. Before I posted, I had checked thefreedictionary.com/condition, wherein some examples use articles while some don't. If you can clearly tell me whether an article should be used in various kinds of situations, it's much appreciated.
– Captain Bohemian
May 9 at 19:04
Yes that would be redundant, whihc would be why you couldn't find any examples… and what happened when you tried, please? "The university itself, moreover, is also unable…" is rather sloppy but if was perfect, it would still be nothing like saying "also moreover".
– Robbie Goodwin
May 22 at 22:00
@RobbieGoodwin The example I want is in a research paper, after several arguments are given, and finally you want to add something to supplement or emphasize the previous arguments. I haven't paid attention to this point in research papers, but next time if I find this structure, I will pay attention to it. As for the second example, in the comment following the answer to my question, Jason Bassford has given an example of the pretext wherein "...moreover ... also ..." isn't a redundancy.
– Captain Bohemian
May 23 at 4:34
|
show 13 more comments
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
I read from The Free Thesaurus that "moreover", "further", "furthermore", "besides", "additionally", as well as "also" are synonyms. So is using one of those words along with an "also" in a style exemplified as follows a redundancy?
My hometown is a deplorable place for it is so urbanized a concrete jungle that even access to a tiny piece of the natural scene therein is desperate, and moreover, the cost of living therein is also so exorbitant that one usually has to have a very highly paid job to reach decent material condition.
Should either "moreover" or "also" be removed?
On the other hand, I see, in Oxford Dictionaries, an example:
The university itself, moreover, is also unable to launch a serious
defence of the proposed centre.
Therein "moreover" and "also" are used together.
Therefore I wonder whether it is proper to use one of the enumerated words together with "also".
redundancy
asked May 9 at 17:22
Captain Bohemian
265
I read from The Free Thesaurus that "moreover", "further", "furthermore", "besides", "additionally", as well as "also" are synonyms. So is using one of those words along with an "also" in a style exemplified as follows a redundancy?
My hometown is a deplorable place for it is so urbanized a concrete jungle that even access to a tiny piece of the natural scene therein is desperate, and moreover, the cost of living therein is also so exorbitant that one usually has to have a very highly paid job to reach decent material condition.
Should either "moreover" or "also" be removed?
On the other hand, I see, in Oxford Dictionaries, an example:
The university itself, moreover, is also unable to launch a serious
defence of the proposed centre.
Therein "moreover" and "also" are used together.
Therefore I wonder whether it is proper to use one of the enumerated words together with "also".
redundancy
redundancy
asked May 9 at 17:22
Captain Bohemian
265
asked May 9 at 17:22
Captain Bohemian
265
edited May 9 at 19:15
asked May 9 at 17:22
Captain Bohemian
265
asked May 9 at 17:22
Captain Bohemian
265
asked May 9 at 17:22
Captain Bohemian
265
265
bumped to the homepage by Community♦ 34 mins ago
This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed.
bumped to the homepage by Community♦ 34 mins ago
This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed.
Your quoted sentence, to me, is unclear. The section, 'it is so urbanised a concrete jungle that even...', seems like a fragment was inserted in the sentence. Similarly, I think there is a missing article before 'decent material condition'.
– ifly6
May 9 at 17:50
@ifly6 I know that quote misses some pretexts, but as you can check from that link, all examples in that dictionary are that way, so you can only interpret them based on your imagination. Then, I don't know what you mean by "a fragment was inserted in the sentence"; I just use that section to elaborate why my hometown is a deplorable place. I actually just make a plain example, which is, nevertheless, real, of a style I often wish to use in my real writing, which is in scientific contexts.
– Captain Bohemian
May 9 at 18:57
@ifly6 I am not sure if an article should be placed prior to "condition" here. Before I posted, I had checked thefreedictionary.com/condition, wherein some examples use articles while some don't. If you can clearly tell me whether an article should be used in various kinds of situations, it's much appreciated.
– Captain Bohemian
May 9 at 19:04
Yes that would be redundant, whihc would be why you couldn't find any examples… and what happened when you tried, please? "The university itself, moreover, is also unable…" is rather sloppy but if was perfect, it would still be nothing like saying "also moreover".
– Robbie Goodwin
May 22 at 22:00
@RobbieGoodwin The example I want is in a research paper, after several arguments are given, and finally you want to add something to supplement or emphasize the previous arguments. I haven't paid attention to this point in research papers, but next time if I find this structure, I will pay attention to it. As for the second example, in the comment following the answer to my question, Jason Bassford has given an example of the pretext wherein "...moreover ... also ..." isn't a redundancy.
– Captain Bohemian
May 23 at 4:34
|
show 13 more comments
Your quoted sentence, to me, is unclear. The section, 'it is so urbanised a concrete jungle that even...', seems like a fragment was inserted in the sentence. Similarly, I think there is a missing article before 'decent material condition'.
– ifly6
May 9 at 17:50
@ifly6 I know that quote misses some pretexts, but as you can check from that link, all examples in that dictionary are that way, so you can only interpret them based on your imagination. Then, I don't know what you mean by "a fragment was inserted in the sentence"; I just use that section to elaborate why my hometown is a deplorable place. I actually just make a plain example, which is, nevertheless, real, of a style I often wish to use in my real writing, which is in scientific contexts.
– Captain Bohemian
May 9 at 18:57
@ifly6 I am not sure if an article should be placed prior to "condition" here. Before I posted, I had checked thefreedictionary.com/condition, wherein some examples use articles while some don't. If you can clearly tell me whether an article should be used in various kinds of situations, it's much appreciated.
– Captain Bohemian
May 9 at 19:04
Yes that would be redundant, whihc would be why you couldn't find any examples… and what happened when you tried, please? "The university itself, moreover, is also unable…" is rather sloppy but if was perfect, it would still be nothing like saying "also moreover".
– Robbie Goodwin
May 22 at 22:00
@RobbieGoodwin The example I want is in a research paper, after several arguments are given, and finally you want to add something to supplement or emphasize the previous arguments. I haven't paid attention to this point in research papers, but next time if I find this structure, I will pay attention to it. As for the second example, in the comment following the answer to my question, Jason Bassford has given an example of the pretext wherein "...moreover ... also ..." isn't a redundancy.
– Captain Bohemian
May 23 at 4:34
Your quoted sentence, to me, is unclear. The section, 'it is so urbanised a concrete jungle that even...', seems like a fragment was inserted in the sentence. Similarly, I think there is a missing article before 'decent material condition'.
– ifly6
May 9 at 17:50
Your quoted sentence, to me, is unclear. The section, 'it is so urbanised a concrete jungle that even...', seems like a fragment was inserted in the sentence. Similarly, I think there is a missing article before 'decent material condition'.
– ifly6
May 9 at 17:50
@ifly6 I know that quote misses some pretexts, but as you can check from that link, all examples in that dictionary are that way, so you can only interpret them based on your imagination. Then, I don't know what you mean by "a fragment was inserted in the sentence"; I just use that section to elaborate why my hometown is a deplorable place. I actually just make a plain example, which is, nevertheless, real, of a style I often wish to use in my real writing, which is in scientific contexts.
– Captain Bohemian
May 9 at 18:57
@ifly6 I know that quote misses some pretexts, but as you can check from that link, all examples in that dictionary are that way, so you can only interpret them based on your imagination. Then, I don't know what you mean by "a fragment was inserted in the sentence"; I just use that section to elaborate why my hometown is a deplorable place. I actually just make a plain example, which is, nevertheless, real, of a style I often wish to use in my real writing, which is in scientific contexts.
– Captain Bohemian
May 9 at 18:57
@ifly6 I am not sure if an article should be placed prior to "condition" here. Before I posted, I had checked thefreedictionary.com/condition, wherein some examples use articles while some don't. If you can clearly tell me whether an article should be used in various kinds of situations, it's much appreciated.
– Captain Bohemian
May 9 at 19:04
@ifly6 I am not sure if an article should be placed prior to "condition" here. Before I posted, I had checked thefreedictionary.com/condition, wherein some examples use articles while some don't. If you can clearly tell me whether an article should be used in various kinds of situations, it's much appreciated.
– Captain Bohemian
May 9 at 19:04
Yes that would be redundant, whihc would be why you couldn't find any examples… and what happened when you tried, please? "The university itself, moreover, is also unable…" is rather sloppy but if was perfect, it would still be nothing like saying "also moreover".
– Robbie Goodwin
May 22 at 22:00
Yes that would be redundant, whihc would be why you couldn't find any examples… and what happened when you tried, please? "The university itself, moreover, is also unable…" is rather sloppy but if was perfect, it would still be nothing like saying "also moreover".
– Robbie Goodwin
May 22 at 22:00
@RobbieGoodwin The example I want is in a research paper, after several arguments are given, and finally you want to add something to supplement or emphasize the previous arguments. I haven't paid attention to this point in research papers, but next time if I find this structure, I will pay attention to it. As for the second example, in the comment following the answer to my question, Jason Bassford has given an example of the pretext wherein "...moreover ... also ..." isn't a redundancy.
– Captain Bohemian
May 23 at 4:34
@RobbieGoodwin The example I want is in a research paper, after several arguments are given, and finally you want to add something to supplement or emphasize the previous arguments. I haven't paid attention to this point in research papers, but next time if I find this structure, I will pay attention to it. As for the second example, in the comment following the answer to my question, Jason Bassford has given an example of the pretext wherein "...moreover ... also ..." isn't a redundancy.
– Captain Bohemian
May 23 at 4:34
|
show 13 more comments
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
up vote
0
down vote
I cannot hit every aspect the OP raises but I will address "moreover" and "also" in the first segment he gives.
My hometown is a deplorable place for it is so urbanized a concrete jungle that even access to a tiny piece of the natural scene therein is desperate, and moreover, the cost of living therein is also so exorbitant that one usually has to have a very highly paid job to reach decent material condition.
To simplify that
My hometown is ugly for x, y, and z reasons, moreover, the cost is (also) more than most can afford.
"Moreover" could be replaced with 'and' or 'and also' if you wanted.
My hometown is ugly in this complex way, and (also) has high rent.
But the problem with 'also' (where you have it) is NOT redundancy !
The issue is your are signaling a second attribute to "cost" that is not there.
This would work:
My hometown is ugly for complex reasons, moreover, the cost is hard to afford and also a bad value relative to other states.
So - not redundancy, but a comparative word placed where there is nothing it is being compared to.
As for the Oxford Living Dictionaries
The university itself, moreover, is also unable to launch a serious defence of the proposed centre.
@Jason_Bassford 's comment to another answer gives one way the sentence could work.
The residents are unable to launch a serious defence of the proposed educational centre. The university itself, moreover, is also unable to launch a serious defence of the proposed centre.
I would admit that the word "itself" and/or an omission of and object or party that the defense is being launched at boxes the "is also" into a mirror response.
Without 'itself' the university might be unable to do a few things in prior sentences.
If there were an object like "neighbors" then you could have Chemistry department is unable to convince it's faculty. Moreover, the University has been unable to launch at defense for the center in the planning council meetings.
answered Jun 9 at 1:49
Tom22
5,6541026
In the part of your answer regarding my first example, should "and" be put prior to "moreover" as a conjunction?
– Captain Bohemian
Oct 29 at 11:19
I'm kind of a ways out mentally on this question and - don't want to sound too strident on grammar rules without confirmation of others. I hope what I said helped. As for "and" whether or not that is strictly correct or not I think it is either Redundant OR will Sound Redundant to a large part of an audience. We can't lose track of the idea we write to ~communicate~ and if you lose part of your audience, it's kind of a moot point what is right. In that spirit, I would suggest considering dropping "moreover" entirely - it is a bit stuffy or dated IMO.
– Tom22
Nov 5 at 22:40
I think that "also importantly" might be a more modern choice for you that hits my concern (whether it came through the way I said it or not) that moreover should accentuate the ramification of the prior issue rather than opening a new one. "on top of that" , "if that wasn't enough", 'not only', "surprisingly, despite those defects" just brainstorming for you.
– Tom22
Nov 5 at 22:44
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
Also can be used in two ways: First, it can be used as a synonym of moreover and other words that mean “in addition,” as in, “Also, here is some more information.” Second, also can be used as a synonym of too or likewise, as in, “I also do not like summer.” Generally, the first usage will be in an introductory form; that is, at the beginning of a sentence or clause.
add a comment |
up vote
-1
down vote
"Also" is redundant, which you can tell from the fact that its removal has no impact on the meaning of the sentence. Also, "so exorbitant" is redundant. You need "so" for the "so X that" construction, so replace the absolute "exorbitant" with the neutral "expensive".
answered May 9 at 18:51
Green Grasso Holm
2,261416
1
No, that's not necessarily correct. It depends on the context. Consider a possible prior sentence to the second example: The residents are unable to launch a serious defence of the proposed educational centre. The university itself, moreover, is also unable to launch a serious defence of the proposed centre. The meaning here is that not only can the residents not support it, but the university (tasked with education specifically) cannot. The use of also is a necessary linkage—and the meaning would change with its absence.
– Jason Bassford
May 9 at 19:38
Was your answer with respect to only the first example sentence? Or an answer to all uses?
– Jason Bassford
May 9 at 19:45
In the "so ... that" construction, must the adjective following "so" a comparable one? And is "exorbitant" an absolute adjective? If that's the case, I didn't know these, so thank you for telling me these.
– Captain Bohemian
May 9 at 19:53
1
@JasonBassford You envisage a pretext I didn't think of. After reading this answer, I originally thought, based on the pretext I could imagine for the second example, removing either "moreover" or "also' doesn't affect the meaning of that sentence, either. But after reading your conceived pretext, I have to second-think. Probably whether "moreover" or "also" can be removed may really depend on the context. The example I make on my own is also just an illustration of a style which I often wish to use. I don't only want an answer to that example but an answer to general examples of that style.
– Captain Bohemian
May 9 at 20:23
@JasonBassford Excuse me, may I clarify a point with you? While I appreciate your addressing a possibility wherein using "moreover" and "also" together is not a redundancy, I don't quite agree that removing "also" would change the meaning of the sentence. I think all these words "moreover/..." and "also" are for emphasis rather than adding concrete meaning, and the reason that both "moreover" and "also" in the 2nd example are better not to be removed is that they refer to different things, whereas in my 1st example, either "moreover" or "also" can be removed for they refer to the same thing.
– Captain Bohemian
May 12 at 18:38
add a comment |
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
0
down vote
I cannot hit every aspect the OP raises but I will address "moreover" and "also" in the first segment he gives.
My hometown is a deplorable place for it is so urbanized a concrete jungle that even access to a tiny piece of the natural scene therein is desperate, and moreover, the cost of living therein is also so exorbitant that one usually has to have a very highly paid job to reach decent material condition.
To simplify that
My hometown is ugly for x, y, and z reasons, moreover, the cost is (also) more than most can afford.
"Moreover" could be replaced with 'and' or 'and also' if you wanted.
My hometown is ugly in this complex way, and (also) has high rent.
But the problem with 'also' (where you have it) is NOT redundancy !
The issue is your are signaling a second attribute to "cost" that is not there.
This would work:
My hometown is ugly for complex reasons, moreover, the cost is hard to afford and also a bad value relative to other states.
So - not redundancy, but a comparative word placed where there is nothing it is being compared to.
As for the Oxford Living Dictionaries
The university itself, moreover, is also unable to launch a serious defence of the proposed centre.
@Jason_Bassford 's comment to another answer gives one way the sentence could work.
The residents are unable to launch a serious defence of the proposed educational centre. The university itself, moreover, is also unable to launch a serious defence of the proposed centre.
I would admit that the word "itself" and/or an omission of and object or party that the defense is being launched at boxes the "is also" into a mirror response.
Without 'itself' the university might be unable to do a few things in prior sentences.
If there were an object like "neighbors" then you could have Chemistry department is unable to convince it's faculty. Moreover, the University has been unable to launch at defense for the center in the planning council meetings.
answered Jun 9 at 1:49
Tom22
5,6541026
In the part of your answer regarding my first example, should "and" be put prior to "moreover" as a conjunction?
– Captain Bohemian
Oct 29 at 11:19
I'm kind of a ways out mentally on this question and - don't want to sound too strident on grammar rules without confirmation of others. I hope what I said helped. As for "and" whether or not that is strictly correct or not I think it is either Redundant OR will Sound Redundant to a large part of an audience. We can't lose track of the idea we write to ~communicate~ and if you lose part of your audience, it's kind of a moot point what is right. In that spirit, I would suggest considering dropping "moreover" entirely - it is a bit stuffy or dated IMO.
– Tom22
Nov 5 at 22:40
I think that "also importantly" might be a more modern choice for you that hits my concern (whether it came through the way I said it or not) that moreover should accentuate the ramification of the prior issue rather than opening a new one. "on top of that" , "if that wasn't enough", 'not only', "surprisingly, despite those defects" just brainstorming for you.
– Tom22
Nov 5 at 22:44
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
I cannot hit every aspect the OP raises but I will address "moreover" and "also" in the first segment he gives.
My hometown is a deplorable place for it is so urbanized a concrete jungle that even access to a tiny piece of the natural scene therein is desperate, and moreover, the cost of living therein is also so exorbitant that one usually has to have a very highly paid job to reach decent material condition.
To simplify that
My hometown is ugly for x, y, and z reasons, moreover, the cost is (also) more than most can afford.
"Moreover" could be replaced with 'and' or 'and also' if you wanted.
My hometown is ugly in this complex way, and (also) has high rent.
But the problem with 'also' (where you have it) is NOT redundancy !
The issue is your are signaling a second attribute to "cost" that is not there.
This would work:
My hometown is ugly for complex reasons, moreover, the cost is hard to afford and also a bad value relative to other states.
So - not redundancy, but a comparative word placed where there is nothing it is being compared to.
As for the Oxford Living Dictionaries
The university itself, moreover, is also unable to launch a serious defence of the proposed centre.
@Jason_Bassford 's comment to another answer gives one way the sentence could work.
The residents are unable to launch a serious defence of the proposed educational centre. The university itself, moreover, is also unable to launch a serious defence of the proposed centre.
I would admit that the word "itself" and/or an omission of and object or party that the defense is being launched at boxes the "is also" into a mirror response.
Without 'itself' the university might be unable to do a few things in prior sentences.
If there were an object like "neighbors" then you could have Chemistry department is unable to convince it's faculty. Moreover, the University has been unable to launch at defense for the center in the planning council meetings.
answered Jun 9 at 1:49
Tom22
5,6541026
In the part of your answer regarding my first example, should "and" be put prior to "moreover" as a conjunction?
– Captain Bohemian
Oct 29 at 11:19
I'm kind of a ways out mentally on this question and - don't want to sound too strident on grammar rules without confirmation of others. I hope what I said helped. As for "and" whether or not that is strictly correct or not I think it is either Redundant OR will Sound Redundant to a large part of an audience. We can't lose track of the idea we write to ~communicate~ and if you lose part of your audience, it's kind of a moot point what is right. In that spirit, I would suggest considering dropping "moreover" entirely - it is a bit stuffy or dated IMO.
– Tom22
Nov 5 at 22:40
I think that "also importantly" might be a more modern choice for you that hits my concern (whether it came through the way I said it or not) that moreover should accentuate the ramification of the prior issue rather than opening a new one. "on top of that" , "if that wasn't enough", 'not only', "surprisingly, despite those defects" just brainstorming for you.
– Tom22
Nov 5 at 22:44
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
up vote
0
down vote
I cannot hit every aspect the OP raises but I will address "moreover" and "also" in the first segment he gives.
My hometown is a deplorable place for it is so urbanized a concrete jungle that even access to a tiny piece of the natural scene therein is desperate, and moreover, the cost of living therein is also so exorbitant that one usually has to have a very highly paid job to reach decent material condition.
To simplify that
My hometown is ugly for x, y, and z reasons, moreover, the cost is (also) more than most can afford.
"Moreover" could be replaced with 'and' or 'and also' if you wanted.
My hometown is ugly in this complex way, and (also) has high rent.
But the problem with 'also' (where you have it) is NOT redundancy !
The issue is your are signaling a second attribute to "cost" that is not there.
This would work:
My hometown is ugly for complex reasons, moreover, the cost is hard to afford and also a bad value relative to other states.
So - not redundancy, but a comparative word placed where there is nothing it is being compared to.
As for the Oxford Living Dictionaries
The university itself, moreover, is also unable to launch a serious defence of the proposed centre.
@Jason_Bassford 's comment to another answer gives one way the sentence could work.
The residents are unable to launch a serious defence of the proposed educational centre. The university itself, moreover, is also unable to launch a serious defence of the proposed centre.
I would admit that the word "itself" and/or an omission of and object or party that the defense is being launched at boxes the "is also" into a mirror response.
Without 'itself' the university might be unable to do a few things in prior sentences.
If there were an object like "neighbors" then you could have Chemistry department is unable to convince it's faculty. Moreover, the University has been unable to launch at defense for the center in the planning council meetings.
answered Jun 9 at 1:49
Tom22
5,6541026
I cannot hit every aspect the OP raises but I will address "moreover" and "also" in the first segment he gives.
My hometown is a deplorable place for it is so urbanized a concrete jungle that even access to a tiny piece of the natural scene therein is desperate, and moreover, the cost of living therein is also so exorbitant that one usually has to have a very highly paid job to reach decent material condition.
To simplify that
My hometown is ugly for x, y, and z reasons, moreover, the cost is (also) more than most can afford.
"Moreover" could be replaced with 'and' or 'and also' if you wanted.
My hometown is ugly in this complex way, and (also) has high rent.
But the problem with 'also' (where you have it) is NOT redundancy !
The issue is your are signaling a second attribute to "cost" that is not there.
This would work:
My hometown is ugly for complex reasons, moreover, the cost is hard to afford and also a bad value relative to other states.
So - not redundancy, but a comparative word placed where there is nothing it is being compared to.
As for the Oxford Living Dictionaries
The university itself, moreover, is also unable to launch a serious defence of the proposed centre.
@Jason_Bassford 's comment to another answer gives one way the sentence could work.
The residents are unable to launch a serious defence of the proposed educational centre. The university itself, moreover, is also unable to launch a serious defence of the proposed centre.
I would admit that the word "itself" and/or an omission of and object or party that the defense is being launched at boxes the "is also" into a mirror response.
Without 'itself' the university might be unable to do a few things in prior sentences.
If there were an object like "neighbors" then you could have Chemistry department is unable to convince it's faculty. Moreover, the University has been unable to launch at defense for the center in the planning council meetings.
answered Jun 9 at 1:49
Tom22
5,6541026
answered Jun 9 at 1:49
Tom22
5,6541026
answered Jun 9 at 1:49
Tom22
5,6541026
answered Jun 9 at 1:49
Tom22
5,6541026
5,6541026
In the part of your answer regarding my first example, should "and" be put prior to "moreover" as a conjunction?
– Captain Bohemian
Oct 29 at 11:19
I'm kind of a ways out mentally on this question and - don't want to sound too strident on grammar rules without confirmation of others. I hope what I said helped. As for "and" whether or not that is strictly correct or not I think it is either Redundant OR will Sound Redundant to a large part of an audience. We can't lose track of the idea we write to ~communicate~ and if you lose part of your audience, it's kind of a moot point what is right. In that spirit, I would suggest considering dropping "moreover" entirely - it is a bit stuffy or dated IMO.
– Tom22
Nov 5 at 22:40
I think that "also importantly" might be a more modern choice for you that hits my concern (whether it came through the way I said it or not) that moreover should accentuate the ramification of the prior issue rather than opening a new one. "on top of that" , "if that wasn't enough", 'not only', "surprisingly, despite those defects" just brainstorming for you.
– Tom22
Nov 5 at 22:44
add a comment |
In the part of your answer regarding my first example, should "and" be put prior to "moreover" as a conjunction?
– Captain Bohemian
Oct 29 at 11:19
I'm kind of a ways out mentally on this question and - don't want to sound too strident on grammar rules without confirmation of others. I hope what I said helped. As for "and" whether or not that is strictly correct or not I think it is either Redundant OR will Sound Redundant to a large part of an audience. We can't lose track of the idea we write to ~communicate~ and if you lose part of your audience, it's kind of a moot point what is right. In that spirit, I would suggest considering dropping "moreover" entirely - it is a bit stuffy or dated IMO.
– Tom22
Nov 5 at 22:40
I think that "also importantly" might be a more modern choice for you that hits my concern (whether it came through the way I said it or not) that moreover should accentuate the ramification of the prior issue rather than opening a new one. "on top of that" , "if that wasn't enough", 'not only', "surprisingly, despite those defects" just brainstorming for you.
– Tom22
Nov 5 at 22:44
In the part of your answer regarding my first example, should "and" be put prior to "moreover" as a conjunction?
– Captain Bohemian
Oct 29 at 11:19
In the part of your answer regarding my first example, should "and" be put prior to "moreover" as a conjunction?
– Captain Bohemian
Oct 29 at 11:19
I'm kind of a ways out mentally on this question and - don't want to sound too strident on grammar rules without confirmation of others. I hope what I said helped. As for "and" whether or not that is strictly correct or not I think it is either Redundant OR will Sound Redundant to a large part of an audience. We can't lose track of the idea we write to ~communicate~ and if you lose part of your audience, it's kind of a moot point what is right. In that spirit, I would suggest considering dropping "moreover" entirely - it is a bit stuffy or dated IMO.
– Tom22
Nov 5 at 22:40
I'm kind of a ways out mentally on this question and - don't want to sound too strident on grammar rules without confirmation of others. I hope what I said helped. As for "and" whether or not that is strictly correct or not I think it is either Redundant OR will Sound Redundant to a large part of an audience. We can't lose track of the idea we write to ~communicate~ and if you lose part of your audience, it's kind of a moot point what is right. In that spirit, I would suggest considering dropping "moreover" entirely - it is a bit stuffy or dated IMO.
– Tom22
Nov 5 at 22:40
I think that "also importantly" might be a more modern choice for you that hits my concern (whether it came through the way I said it or not) that moreover should accentuate the ramification of the prior issue rather than opening a new one. "on top of that" , "if that wasn't enough", 'not only', "surprisingly, despite those defects" just brainstorming for you.
– Tom22
Nov 5 at 22:44
I think that "also importantly" might be a more modern choice for you that hits my concern (whether it came through the way I said it or not) that moreover should accentuate the ramification of the prior issue rather than opening a new one. "on top of that" , "if that wasn't enough", 'not only', "surprisingly, despite those defects" just brainstorming for you.
– Tom22
Nov 5 at 22:44
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
Also can be used in two ways: First, it can be used as a synonym of moreover and other words that mean “in addition,” as in, “Also, here is some more information.” Second, also can be used as a synonym of too or likewise, as in, “I also do not like summer.” Generally, the first usage will be in an introductory form; that is, at the beginning of a sentence or clause.
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
Also can be used in two ways: First, it can be used as a synonym of moreover and other words that mean “in addition,” as in, “Also, here is some more information.” Second, also can be used as a synonym of too or likewise, as in, “I also do not like summer.” Generally, the first usage will be in an introductory form; that is, at the beginning of a sentence or clause.
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
up vote
0
down vote
Also can be used in two ways: First, it can be used as a synonym of moreover and other words that mean “in addition,” as in, “Also, here is some more information.” Second, also can be used as a synonym of too or likewise, as in, “I also do not like summer.” Generally, the first usage will be in an introductory form; that is, at the beginning of a sentence or clause.
Also can be used in two ways: First, it can be used as a synonym of moreover and other words that mean “in addition,” as in, “Also, here is some more information.” Second, also can be used as a synonym of too or likewise, as in, “I also do not like summer.” Generally, the first usage will be in an introductory form; that is, at the beginning of a sentence or clause.
edited Aug 9 at 2:29
answered Aug 9 at 2:21
user305707
add a comment |
add a comment |
up vote
-1
down vote
"Also" is redundant, which you can tell from the fact that its removal has no impact on the meaning of the sentence. Also, "so exorbitant" is redundant. You need "so" for the "so X that" construction, so replace the absolute "exorbitant" with the neutral "expensive".
answered May 9 at 18:51
Green Grasso Holm
2,261416
1
No, that's not necessarily correct. It depends on the context. Consider a possible prior sentence to the second example: The residents are unable to launch a serious defence of the proposed educational centre. The university itself, moreover, is also unable to launch a serious defence of the proposed centre. The meaning here is that not only can the residents not support it, but the university (tasked with education specifically) cannot. The use of also is a necessary linkage—and the meaning would change with its absence.
– Jason Bassford
May 9 at 19:38
Was your answer with respect to only the first example sentence? Or an answer to all uses?
– Jason Bassford
May 9 at 19:45
In the "so ... that" construction, must the adjective following "so" a comparable one? And is "exorbitant" an absolute adjective? If that's the case, I didn't know these, so thank you for telling me these.
– Captain Bohemian
May 9 at 19:53
1
@JasonBassford You envisage a pretext I didn't think of. After reading this answer, I originally thought, based on the pretext I could imagine for the second example, removing either "moreover" or "also' doesn't affect the meaning of that sentence, either. But after reading your conceived pretext, I have to second-think. Probably whether "moreover" or "also" can be removed may really depend on the context. The example I make on my own is also just an illustration of a style which I often wish to use. I don't only want an answer to that example but an answer to general examples of that style.
– Captain Bohemian
May 9 at 20:23
@JasonBassford Excuse me, may I clarify a point with you? While I appreciate your addressing a possibility wherein using "moreover" and "also" together is not a redundancy, I don't quite agree that removing "also" would change the meaning of the sentence. I think all these words "moreover/..." and "also" are for emphasis rather than adding concrete meaning, and the reason that both "moreover" and "also" in the 2nd example are better not to be removed is that they refer to different things, whereas in my 1st example, either "moreover" or "also" can be removed for they refer to the same thing.
– Captain Bohemian
May 12 at 18:38
add a comment |
up vote
-1
down vote
"Also" is redundant, which you can tell from the fact that its removal has no impact on the meaning of the sentence. Also, "so exorbitant" is redundant. You need "so" for the "so X that" construction, so replace the absolute "exorbitant" with the neutral "expensive".
answered May 9 at 18:51
Green Grasso Holm
2,261416
1
No, that's not necessarily correct. It depends on the context. Consider a possible prior sentence to the second example: The residents are unable to launch a serious defence of the proposed educational centre. The university itself, moreover, is also unable to launch a serious defence of the proposed centre. The meaning here is that not only can the residents not support it, but the university (tasked with education specifically) cannot. The use of also is a necessary linkage—and the meaning would change with its absence.
– Jason Bassford
May 9 at 19:38
Was your answer with respect to only the first example sentence? Or an answer to all uses?
– Jason Bassford
May 9 at 19:45
In the "so ... that" construction, must the adjective following "so" a comparable one? And is "exorbitant" an absolute adjective? If that's the case, I didn't know these, so thank you for telling me these.
– Captain Bohemian
May 9 at 19:53
1
@JasonBassford You envisage a pretext I didn't think of. After reading this answer, I originally thought, based on the pretext I could imagine for the second example, removing either "moreover" or "also' doesn't affect the meaning of that sentence, either. But after reading your conceived pretext, I have to second-think. Probably whether "moreover" or "also" can be removed may really depend on the context. The example I make on my own is also just an illustration of a style which I often wish to use. I don't only want an answer to that example but an answer to general examples of that style.
– Captain Bohemian
May 9 at 20:23
@JasonBassford Excuse me, may I clarify a point with you? While I appreciate your addressing a possibility wherein using "moreover" and "also" together is not a redundancy, I don't quite agree that removing "also" would change the meaning of the sentence. I think all these words "moreover/..." and "also" are for emphasis rather than adding concrete meaning, and the reason that both "moreover" and "also" in the 2nd example are better not to be removed is that they refer to different things, whereas in my 1st example, either "moreover" or "also" can be removed for they refer to the same thing.
– Captain Bohemian
May 12 at 18:38
add a comment |
up vote
-1
down vote
up vote
-1
down vote
"Also" is redundant, which you can tell from the fact that its removal has no impact on the meaning of the sentence. Also, "so exorbitant" is redundant. You need "so" for the "so X that" construction, so replace the absolute "exorbitant" with the neutral "expensive".
answered May 9 at 18:51
Green Grasso Holm
2,261416
"Also" is redundant, which you can tell from the fact that its removal has no impact on the meaning of the sentence. Also, "so exorbitant" is redundant. You need "so" for the "so X that" construction, so replace the absolute "exorbitant" with the neutral "expensive".
answered May 9 at 18:51
Green Grasso Holm
2,261416
answered May 9 at 18:51
Green Grasso Holm
2,261416
answered May 9 at 18:51
Green Grasso Holm
2,261416
answered May 9 at 18:51
Green Grasso Holm
2,261416
2,261416
1
No, that's not necessarily correct. It depends on the context. Consider a possible prior sentence to the second example: The residents are unable to launch a serious defence of the proposed educational centre. The university itself, moreover, is also unable to launch a serious defence of the proposed centre. The meaning here is that not only can the residents not support it, but the university (tasked with education specifically) cannot. The use of also is a necessary linkage—and the meaning would change with its absence.
– Jason Bassford
May 9 at 19:38
Was your answer with respect to only the first example sentence? Or an answer to all uses?
– Jason Bassford
May 9 at 19:45
In the "so ... that" construction, must the adjective following "so" a comparable one? And is "exorbitant" an absolute adjective? If that's the case, I didn't know these, so thank you for telling me these.
– Captain Bohemian
May 9 at 19:53
1
@JasonBassford You envisage a pretext I didn't think of. After reading this answer, I originally thought, based on the pretext I could imagine for the second example, removing either "moreover" or "also' doesn't affect the meaning of that sentence, either. But after reading your conceived pretext, I have to second-think. Probably whether "moreover" or "also" can be removed may really depend on the context. The example I make on my own is also just an illustration of a style which I often wish to use. I don't only want an answer to that example but an answer to general examples of that style.
– Captain Bohemian
May 9 at 20:23
@JasonBassford Excuse me, may I clarify a point with you? While I appreciate your addressing a possibility wherein using "moreover" and "also" together is not a redundancy, I don't quite agree that removing "also" would change the meaning of the sentence. I think all these words "moreover/..." and "also" are for emphasis rather than adding concrete meaning, and the reason that both "moreover" and "also" in the 2nd example are better not to be removed is that they refer to different things, whereas in my 1st example, either "moreover" or "also" can be removed for they refer to the same thing.
– Captain Bohemian
May 12 at 18:38
add a comment |
1
No, that's not necessarily correct. It depends on the context. Consider a possible prior sentence to the second example: The residents are unable to launch a serious defence of the proposed educational centre. The university itself, moreover, is also unable to launch a serious defence of the proposed centre. The meaning here is that not only can the residents not support it, but the university (tasked with education specifically) cannot. The use of also is a necessary linkage—and the meaning would change with its absence.
– Jason Bassford
May 9 at 19:38
Was your answer with respect to only the first example sentence? Or an answer to all uses?
– Jason Bassford
May 9 at 19:45
In the "so ... that" construction, must the adjective following "so" a comparable one? And is "exorbitant" an absolute adjective? If that's the case, I didn't know these, so thank you for telling me these.
– Captain Bohemian
May 9 at 19:53
1
@JasonBassford You envisage a pretext I didn't think of. After reading this answer, I originally thought, based on the pretext I could imagine for the second example, removing either "moreover" or "also' doesn't affect the meaning of that sentence, either. But after reading your conceived pretext, I have to second-think. Probably whether "moreover" or "also" can be removed may really depend on the context. The example I make on my own is also just an illustration of a style which I often wish to use. I don't only want an answer to that example but an answer to general examples of that style.
– Captain Bohemian
May 9 at 20:23
@JasonBassford Excuse me, may I clarify a point with you? While I appreciate your addressing a possibility wherein using "moreover" and "also" together is not a redundancy, I don't quite agree that removing "also" would change the meaning of the sentence. I think all these words "moreover/..." and "also" are for emphasis rather than adding concrete meaning, and the reason that both "moreover" and "also" in the 2nd example are better not to be removed is that they refer to different things, whereas in my 1st example, either "moreover" or "also" can be removed for they refer to the same thing.
– Captain Bohemian
May 12 at 18:38
1
1
No, that's not necessarily correct. It depends on the context. Consider a possible prior sentence to the second example: The residents are unable to launch a serious defence of the proposed educational centre. The university itself, moreover, is also unable to launch a serious defence of the proposed centre. The meaning here is that not only can the residents not support it, but the university (tasked with education specifically) cannot. The use of also is a necessary linkage—and the meaning would change with its absence.
– Jason Bassford
May 9 at 19:38
No, that's not necessarily correct. It depends on the context. Consider a possible prior sentence to the second example: The residents are unable to launch a serious defence of the proposed educational centre. The university itself, moreover, is also unable to launch a serious defence of the proposed centre. The meaning here is that not only can the residents not support it, but the university (tasked with education specifically) cannot. The use of also is a necessary linkage—and the meaning would change with its absence.
– Jason Bassford
May 9 at 19:38
Was your answer with respect to only the first example sentence? Or an answer to all uses?
– Jason Bassford
May 9 at 19:45
Was your answer with respect to only the first example sentence? Or an answer to all uses?
– Jason Bassford
May 9 at 19:45
In the "so ... that" construction, must the adjective following "so" a comparable one? And is "exorbitant" an absolute adjective? If that's the case, I didn't know these, so thank you for telling me these.
– Captain Bohemian
May 9 at 19:53
In the "so ... that" construction, must the adjective following "so" a comparable one? And is "exorbitant" an absolute adjective? If that's the case, I didn't know these, so thank you for telling me these.
– Captain Bohemian
May 9 at 19:53
1
1
@JasonBassford You envisage a pretext I didn't think of. After reading this answer, I originally thought, based on the pretext I could imagine for the second example, removing either "moreover" or "also' doesn't affect the meaning of that sentence, either. But after reading your conceived pretext, I have to second-think. Probably whether "moreover" or "also" can be removed may really depend on the context. The example I make on my own is also just an illustration of a style which I often wish to use. I don't only want an answer to that example but an answer to general examples of that style.
– Captain Bohemian
May 9 at 20:23
@JasonBassford You envisage a pretext I didn't think of. After reading this answer, I originally thought, based on the pretext I could imagine for the second example, removing either "moreover" or "also' doesn't affect the meaning of that sentence, either. But after reading your conceived pretext, I have to second-think. Probably whether "moreover" or "also" can be removed may really depend on the context. The example I make on my own is also just an illustration of a style which I often wish to use. I don't only want an answer to that example but an answer to general examples of that style.
– Captain Bohemian
May 9 at 20:23
@JasonBassford Excuse me, may I clarify a point with you? While I appreciate your addressing a possibility wherein using "moreover" and "also" together is not a redundancy, I don't quite agree that removing "also" would change the meaning of the sentence. I think all these words "moreover/..." and "also" are for emphasis rather than adding concrete meaning, and the reason that both "moreover" and "also" in the 2nd example are better not to be removed is that they refer to different things, whereas in my 1st example, either "moreover" or "also" can be removed for they refer to the same thing.
– Captain Bohemian
May 12 at 18:38
@JasonBassford Excuse me, may I clarify a point with you? While I appreciate your addressing a possibility wherein using "moreover" and "also" together is not a redundancy, I don't quite agree that removing "also" would change the meaning of the sentence. I think all these words "moreover/..." and "also" are for emphasis rather than adding concrete meaning, and the reason that both "moreover" and "also" in the 2nd example are better not to be removed is that they refer to different things, whereas in my 1st example, either "moreover" or "also" can be removed for they refer to the same thing.
– Captain Bohemian
May 12 at 18:38
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to English Language & Usage Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f445430%2fis-moreover-further-furthermore-besides-additionally-used-together-with-also%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Your quoted sentence, to me, is unclear. The section, 'it is so urbanised a concrete jungle that even...', seems like a fragment was inserted in the sentence. Similarly, I think there is a missing article before 'decent material condition'.
– ifly6
May 9 at 17:50
@ifly6 I know that quote misses some pretexts, but as you can check from that link, all examples in that dictionary are that way, so you can only interpret them based on your imagination. Then, I don't know what you mean by "a fragment was inserted in the sentence"; I just use that section to elaborate why my hometown is a deplorable place. I actually just make a plain example, which is, nevertheless, real, of a style I often wish to use in my real writing, which is in scientific contexts.
– Captain Bohemian
May 9 at 18:57
@ifly6 I am not sure if an article should be placed prior to "condition" here. Before I posted, I had checked thefreedictionary.com/condition, wherein some examples use articles while some don't. If you can clearly tell me whether an article should be used in various kinds of situations, it's much appreciated.
– Captain Bohemian
May 9 at 19:04
Yes that would be redundant, whihc would be why you couldn't find any examples… and what happened when you tried, please? "The university itself, moreover, is also unable…" is rather sloppy but if was perfect, it would still be nothing like saying "also moreover".
– Robbie Goodwin
May 22 at 22:00
@RobbieGoodwin The example I want is in a research paper, after several arguments are given, and finally you want to add something to supplement or emphasize the previous arguments. I haven't paid attention to this point in research papers, but next time if I find this structure, I will pay attention to it. As for the second example, in the comment following the answer to my question, Jason Bassford has given an example of the pretext wherein "...moreover ... also ..." isn't a redundancy.
– Captain Bohemian
May 23 at 4:34