Two "treatments" used in a row

Forums: English, Esl, Grammar, English Grammar, English As A Second Language
Email this Topic • Print this Page

Of " its treatments, and the professionals who provide the treatments" is very clear. But two "treatments" have been used in a row and the writing looks not very good.
If I rewrite it as " its treatments, and the professionals who provide the them", it would look a bit ambiguous.
How to solve the dilemma?

Context:

Introduction by the column editors:

The current political controversy over parity for insurance coverage
of mental disorders is a consequence of the long-standing stigma against mental illness, its treatments, and the professionals who provide the treatments. Psychiatrists have traditionally been viewed by their colleagues in other fields of medicine as lacking the full credentials and abilities of other
practicing physicians. Psychiatric disorders have been caught up in the “mind” segment of the “mind-body” dualism still subscribed to by
most citizens, many physicians, and even many in the mental health
field itself. Few policy makers and

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Question • Score: 7 • Views: 743 • Replies: 14

No top replies

View best answer, chosen by oristarA

@oristarA,

"who provide the care" might be a way to go.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

BillRM wrote:

"who provide the care" might be a way to go.

Quite cool.
Thank you.

0 Replies

@oristarA,

Your two examples and Bill's are all good. There's a general feeling that we should not keep using the same word over and over and over, but I know of no such rule, and sometimes the repetition is to good effect. If the treatment you are speaking of involves a hair salon, and the professional is a professional hair dresser, you might very well keep hammering in the word professional.

Sometimes the repetition is good, and sometimes just tedious.

0 Replies

Quote:

its treatments, and the professionals who provide the them

Just remove the incorrect 'the' and the wording is fine, and not at all ambiguous. 'Them' clearly refers to 'its treatments'.

its treatments, and the professionals who provide them.

You are correct to wish to avoid excessive repetition, and in this case, are justified.

My photographs, and the people who appear in them.

Its wheels, and the tyres on them. ("tires" is US spelling)

Your parents, and the gifts for them.

3 Replies

@contrex,

Agreeing with contrex

Quote:

...its treatments, and the professionals who provide them.

is the logical way to go.

0 Replies

@contrex,

contrex wrote:

Quote:
its treatments, and the professionals who provide the them

Just remove the incorrect 'the' and the wording is fine, and not at all ambiguous. 'Them' clearly refers to 'its treatments'.

its treatments, and the professionals who provide them.

Of course "the" was a typo. I was stunned as well to find such mistake there. Sometimes there is a ghost who occasionally comes out to haunt when we type.

1 Reply

@oristarA,

oristarA wrote:

there is a ghost who occasionally comes out to haunt when we type.

He visits me often, especially when I try to correct other people.

0 Replies

@contrex,

Quote:

You are correct to wish to avoid excessive repetition, and in this case, are justified.

The writer's intent is not something that you would be able to judge in this case, C. It's is not at all "correct" to avoid repetition. While English makes great, and common use of pronouns to avoid repetition, you have completely ignored Roger's comments, which point up that repetition is used for effect.

There's a general feeling that we should not keep using the same word over and over and over, but I know of no such rule, and sometimes the repetition is to good effect.

Yes, there is that knee jerk "general feeling". But there is that same knee jerk general feeling about a lot of English. That's what the silly peeves threads were all about.

1 Reply

@oristarA,

A lawyer might rewrite it by replacing "the treatments" with "same." ("... its treatments, and the professionals who provide same.")

That doesn't mean you should, of course. Who wants to sound like a lawyer?

0 Replies

@JTT,

JTT wrote:

It's is not at all "correct" to avoid repetition.

It is always correct to avoid excessive repetition, which is what I wrote.

Quote:

you have completely ignored Roger's comments, which point up that repetition is used for effect.

I have not ignored them. This is not Churchill's "fight them on the beaches" speech, it's a bit of science journalism. It does not need any "effect".

Quote:

There's a general feeling that we should not keep using the same word over and over and over

There is a widespread feeling that writing should not tire the reader.

Quote:

but I know of no such rule

That's because there is no such 'rule'. Nobody said there was. Don't set up a straw man.

Quote:

sometimes the repetition is to good effect.

This is not one of those times.

2 Replies

@contrex,

Swell. I think you've quoted everything but this.

roger wrote:

Sometimes the repetition is good, and sometimes just tedious.

1 Reply

@contrex,

Quote:

It is always correct to avoid excessive repetition, which is what I wrote.

"excessive repetition" does not apply to this situation.

Quote:

This is not Churchill's "fight them on the beaches" speech, it's a bit of science journalism. It does not need any "effect".

That's hardly your choice to make given that you didn't write the article.

Quote:

There is a widespread feeling that writing should not tire the reader.

I know. There's also a widespread feeling about split infinitives and restrictive vs nonrestrictive pronouns and the subjunctive and can vs may and ... .

Quote:

That's because there is no such 'rule'. Nobody said there was. Don't set up a straw man.

Quote:

There is a widespread feeling that writing should not tire the reader.

What was that you were saying about a straw man?

0 Replies

@roger,

roger wrote:

Swell. I think you've quoted everything but this.

roger wrote:

Sometimes the repetition is good, and sometimes just tedious.

Roger, I would say that we are in complete accord. JTT is just spouting his ADD inspired bullshit, as usual.

1 Reply

@contrex,

Being in complete accord with Roger is hardly a good thing, C. He shows flashes of brilliance WHEN he actually takes time to think.

I have to note, aaaaagain, your great reluctance to actually address the specific language issues.

0 Replies

Two "treatments" used in a row

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know