5077
When using the phrase `ほんの一瞬`, I somehow feel compelled to insert `だけ`
afterwards. This seems to be somewhat common (over one million hits for
`"ほんの一瞬だけ"` on Google), but does it seem silly in terms of redundancy? Since
`ほんの` and `だけ` seem to have the same meaning, I'm not sure if I should
actually say `ほんの一瞬だけ`, despite the Google results.
CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-03-20T19:48:22.420
5049
2012-03-22T11:41:32.817
575
question
usage expressions
Is ほんの一瞬【いっしゅん】だけ redundant?
If you interpret both `ほんの` and `だけ` as 'only', then it is redundant. But
notice that `だけ` has another meaning: 'exactly' (This is similar to the
English word `just`; it means 'only' or 'exactly'). If you take it that`ほんの`
means 'only' and `だけ` means 'exactly', then it is not redundant. But probably
the interpretation is a little bit strange: 'only exactly an instant'. I am
doubtful whether there is a precise notion of how long an instant is.
CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-03-20T20:30:22.193
5050
2012-03-20T23:46:39.423
2012-03-20T23:46:39.423
5049
answer
Yes it might be redundant and ungrammatical, but I think I say and write that
way quite often... I think I also use 一瞬だけ and ほんの一瞬 but I think I tend to use
ほんの一瞬だけ when I want to emphasize 'only'. I think it's similar to
たった一回だけ/たった一度だけ, which seem also redundant but I use quite often... so maybe
these expressions are rather casual and colloquial.
CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-03-22T11:41:32.817
5077
2012-03-22T11:41:32.817
5049
answer