Readingtask5

Azi

Reader: 英语2301石希羽
Reading Time: 2025.4.1
Reading Task: Redundant Twins in Chinglish
The text highlights a common feature of Chinglish—the overuse of "redundant twins", defined as pairs of words (nouns, verbs, adjectives, or adverbs) with overlapping meanings. Examples include:
help and assistance → "help"
views and opinions → "views"
fair and equitable → "equitable"
The author classifies redundant pairs into three types:
Category        Examples        Solution
1. Near-identical meaning        prosperity and affluence→ "prosperity"        Delete one word.
2. Implied meaning        best and thorough efforts→ "best efforts"        Remove the redundant term.
3. Vague/indistinct terms        grow and develop further→ "grow"        Replace with a more precise word.

Deletion: Remove one of the twins (e.g., geographical surveys and explorations → "surveys").
Replacement: Use a single stronger word (e.g., faraway and distant → "remote").
Clarification: Add context if needed (e.g., conditions and environment → "working conditions and social environment").
4. Common Redundant Pairs
Examples from the text include:
Nouns: discussions and deliberations, skills and abilities
Verbs: consider and study, endorse and support
Adjectives: strong and solid, weak and faint
Adverbs: correctly and properly, wholly and completely.
Structured and Pedagogical: The text uses clear categories, examples, and action-oriented advice (e.g., underlining modifiers).
Practical Focus: Emphasizes real-world translation challenges with solutions like "delete, replace, clarify."
Tone: Authoritative yet accessible, avoiding jargon while maintaining academic rigor.
Central Insight: Chinglish redundancy stems from Chinese rhetorical preferences (e.g., balance, symmetry) that don’t translate directly to English.
Cultural Nuance: Acknowledges that Chinese pairs like 帮助和援助 (help and assistance) serve purposes like "reinforcing meaning" or "avoiding ambiguity," but argues that English requires concision.
Provides actionable revision strategies.
Differentiates subtle shades of meaning (e.g., predict vs. foretell).
Overlooks cases where duality might intentionally emphasize a point (e.g., poetic or political speech).
Some categories (e.g., "vague terms") could benefit from more linguistic analysis.
Translators/Writers: Offers a framework to identify and eliminate redundancy, improving clarity.
Learners of English: Highlights cultural differences in word usage.
Critique: Might benefit from modern corpus examples (e.g., analyzing government documents or media) to ground advice in contemporary usage.
The text is a pragmatic guide to tackling a persistent issue in Chinglish—redundant word pairs. Its structured approach and real-world examples make it a valuable resource for anyone seeking to write or translate English with greater precision. While its focus on deletion/replacement is occasionally reductive, its core argument for concision aligns with effective communication principles.