Grammar Moses: Must I repeat myself?

That that is, is. That that isn't, isn't.

I just love that. It feels like it should be part of a lost verse from "Qué Será, Será."

A reader named Jan Waichunas wrote: "On page 6 of today's Daily Herald in a story titled 'How Google aims to simplify your life,' the first sentence says: 'Google put the spotlight on its artificial intelligence smarts at its ...' Isn't it redundant to use both 'intelligence' and 'smarts?' Should 'smarts' be left out?"

I don't see a problem with this, Jan.

Just because similar words - or even the same word - run consecutively in a sentence doesn't mean you're being redundant.

If you were writing about the efficacy of a law enforcement internal affairs division, you'd be within your rights to write the headline: "Can police police police?" (where the second is a verb).

My wife asked me the other day whether it would be appropriate to write "I will will you my cats" to a Facebook friend. "Over my dead body" was my reply. But I approved of her phrasing.

When the same word serves different purposes, as in my examples, it's fine.

Clever even.

Back to Jan's query about Google's "artificial intelligence smarts."

The point is not that "intelligence" and "smarts" are next to each other. Just as Google has "mapping smarts," "ad targeting smarts" and "internet monopoly smarts," it has "artificial intelligence smarts."

There was nothing accidental in creating that phrase.

The types of redundancy we should worry about are of the "ATM machine," "9 a.m. in the morning" and "completely destroyed" varieties.

The writer is merely talking about Google's facility for AI.

Pronunciation

Dedicated reader Bonnalee Boyd has a bone to pick with jewelers who advertise "jewlery" and Realtors who self-identify as "Realators."

It's one thing to put the emphasis on a different syllable in a word, an adorable dialectal quirk. I'm reminded of a girl from Herrin with whom I attended college who pronounced the word "um-BRE-lla" as "UM-bre-lla."

But there is a segment of society who would enjoy grabbing those who transpose syllables - the "jewlery" and "Realator" folks - by the ears and shout the appropriate pronunciation at them.

Just last week at my regular morning news meeting, two editors were talking about North Korea, and both pronounced "nuclear" as "nuk-yuh-ler."

If ever there were a good reason to start a nuke-yu-ler war, that was it.

Odds and ends

Jerry Gibson wrote in with a point of clarification for a coupon in our recent Readers' Choice supplement.

He said it entitles the bearer to a "free garment."

"Yippee!!" he proclaimed. "I cannot wait to name the garment of my choice."

I suppose if you wanted to put this poor dry cleaner out of business you could hire a lawyer to force the shop owner to buy you a nice bespoke Savile Row suit or allow you to pick something you like from that cool conveyor system they have. But I think it's pretty clear the offer was for the free laundering of one of your garments.

• And this, from the ever-present Rick Dana Barlow, who wants to know whether I've ever addressed the difference between "discreet" and "discrete."

"Please be discreet with me as my memory fades the closer I get to regular AARP promotional meetings."

Oops, Rick, so much for discretion.

Rick might be the only Moses reader who has yet to receive AARP mailings.

As to your question, Rick: Yes, I've addressed this topic.

As a refresher, things that are discrete are separate and distinct. To be discreet is to be careful in your speech or actions.

In that vein, write discreetly!

• Jim Baumann is vice president/managing editor of the Daily Herald. Write him at jbaumann@dailyherald.com. Put Grammar Moses in the subject line. You also can friend or follow Jim at facebook.com/baumannjim.