For example look at the following text:

The mood of the negotiation were amiable and friendly that they soon reached an agreement.

Is "amiable and friendly" a redundancy? or it is OK to use them together?

  • 1
    Do you mean 'were so amiable'? As it stands, it doesn't make sense, and as the words are exact synonyms I certainly wouldn't use both. Dec 15, 2021 at 9:33

1 Answer 1


I think it's a matter of opinion. My preference in my own writing is to not write two words that have very similar meanings in proximity. If the synonym adds enough different and additional meaning, then I may choose to include it. In this case, I feel that "amiable" and "friendly" are too closely related in definition, so if it were me I would just write:

The mood of the negotiation was friendly and led to a quick resolution.


The amiable mood of the negotiation led to a quick agreement.


That the negotiation was so friendly lended itself to a quick agreement.

You could even use both if you spaced them out enough:

The friendly nature of the negotiation led to a quick and amiable agreement.

Now we are saying that the negotiation was friendly, but what was amiable was the agreement. So this last example extends and differentiates the meaning of those two words more than just describing one thing as both amiable and friendly. Hope that helps.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .