"redundancy of" vs "redundancy in"

Question

"redundancy of" vs "redundancy in"

Both "redundancy in" and "redundancy of" are correct, but they are used in different contexts. "Redundancy in" is used when referring to the presence of unnecessary repetition within something, while "redundancy of" is used to indicate an excess or surplus of something.

Last Updated: March 25, 2024

This phrase is used to indicate an excess or surplus of something. For example, "The redundancy of staff in that department is causing inefficiencies."

Examples:

The redundancy of information in the manual was overwhelming.
The redundancy of tasks was leading to confusion.
The redundancy of features in the product was unnecessary.
The redundancy of words in the document needed to be reduced.
The redundancy of roles in the team was causing conflicts.

Alternatives:

excess of
surplus of
superfluity of
repetition of
duplication of

This phrase is used when referring to the presence of unnecessary repetition within something. For example, "There is a lot of redundancy in this report."

Examples:

There is redundancy in the system that needs to be eliminated.
The redundancy in her speech made it difficult to follow.
The redundancy in the code was causing errors.
The redundancy in the data storage was costing the company money.
The redundancy in his argument weakened his position.

Alternatives:

repetition in
duplication in
unnecessary repetition in
superfluity in
excess in

Answer 1

redundancy of

This phrase is correct and commonly used in English.

Answer 2

redundancy in

This phrase is correct and commonly used in English.

"redundancy of" vs "redundancy in"

redundancy of

redundancy in

Related Comparisons