Is there a legal poaching?












3















I heard the illegal poaching being uttered so many times in a TV show, about animals, that my ear of a non-native speaker, made me questioning the validity of the term.



I have made some Ngram research here and looked up _poaching on Wikipedia, but that results haven't given me a satisfactory answer. As a result, I'm still puzzled.



According to Wikipedia, poaching is defined as:




the illegal hunting or capturing of wild animals.




Hence my question: can there be a legal and an illegal poaching?



Please let me know your thoughts on this.



PS: I am familiar with the word poaching since I first watched the movie Robin Hood, starring Kevin Costner, Elizabeth Mastrantonio, Morgan Freeman, etc., almost two decades ago.






meaning-in-context phrase-meaning vocabulary







share|improve this question

























  • There are many pleonasms in daily use: temper tantrum, future prospects, foreign imports. It's best not to get too worked up about idioms; like other free gifts from the past, the English language is not absolutely perfect.

    – choster
    3 hours ago
















3















I heard the illegal poaching being uttered so many times in a TV show, about animals, that my ear of a non-native speaker, made me questioning the validity of the term.



I have made some Ngram research here and looked up _poaching on Wikipedia, but that results haven't given me a satisfactory answer. As a result, I'm still puzzled.



According to Wikipedia, poaching is defined as:




the illegal hunting or capturing of wild animals.




Hence my question: can there be a legal and an illegal poaching?



Please let me know your thoughts on this.



PS: I am familiar with the word poaching since I first watched the movie Robin Hood, starring Kevin Costner, Elizabeth Mastrantonio, Morgan Freeman, etc., almost two decades ago.






meaning-in-context phrase-meaning vocabulary







share|improve this question

























  • There are many pleonasms in daily use: temper tantrum, future prospects, foreign imports. It's best not to get too worked up about idioms; like other free gifts from the past, the English language is not absolutely perfect.

    – choster
    3 hours ago














3












3








3








I heard the illegal poaching being uttered so many times in a TV show, about animals, that my ear of a non-native speaker, made me questioning the validity of the term.



I have made some Ngram research here and looked up _poaching on Wikipedia, but that results haven't given me a satisfactory answer. As a result, I'm still puzzled.



According to Wikipedia, poaching is defined as:




the illegal hunting or capturing of wild animals.




Hence my question: can there be a legal and an illegal poaching?



Please let me know your thoughts on this.



PS: I am familiar with the word poaching since I first watched the movie Robin Hood, starring Kevin Costner, Elizabeth Mastrantonio, Morgan Freeman, etc., almost two decades ago.






meaning-in-context phrase-meaning vocabulary







share|improve this question
















I heard the illegal poaching being uttered so many times in a TV show, about animals, that my ear of a non-native speaker, made me questioning the validity of the term.



I have made some Ngram research here and looked up _poaching on Wikipedia, but that results haven't given me a satisfactory answer. As a result, I'm still puzzled.



According to Wikipedia, poaching is defined as:




the illegal hunting or capturing of wild animals.




Hence my question: can there be a legal and an illegal poaching?



Please let me know your thoughts on this.



PS: I am familiar with the word poaching since I first watched the movie Robin Hood, starring Kevin Costner, Elizabeth Mastrantonio, Morgan Freeman, etc., almost two decades ago.






meaning-in-context phrase-meaning vocabulary




meaning-in-context phrase-meaning vocabulary






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited 3 hours ago









J.R.♦

99.1k8127245




99.1k8127245










asked 3 hours ago









Lucian SavaLucian Sava

9,063113073




9,063113073













  • There are many pleonasms in daily use: temper tantrum, future prospects, foreign imports. It's best not to get too worked up about idioms; like other free gifts from the past, the English language is not absolutely perfect.

    – choster
    3 hours ago



















  • There are many pleonasms in daily use: temper tantrum, future prospects, foreign imports. It's best not to get too worked up about idioms; like other free gifts from the past, the English language is not absolutely perfect.

    – choster
    3 hours ago

















There are many pleonasms in daily use: temper tantrum, future prospects, foreign imports. It's best not to get too worked up about idioms; like other free gifts from the past, the English language is not absolutely perfect.

– choster
3 hours ago





There are many pleonasms in daily use: temper tantrum, future prospects, foreign imports. It's best not to get too worked up about idioms; like other free gifts from the past, the English language is not absolutely perfect.

– choster
3 hours ago










2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















3














Poaching is always illegal, so the adjective "illegal" is redundant. There is a (rare) word to describe this kind of redundancy: "Pleonastic". It means using more words than needed.



Many style guides recommend reducing redundancy in your writing: You should say "tuna" not "tuna fish". You should not say "the two twins" (since twins implies two) you do not need to say "new innovations" (since innovations are always new).



But pleonastic expressions are not ungrammatical, and some are very common and natural, especially in speech or less formal writing. Sometimes a writer will use a redundant word to emphasise a point.




There are three types of hunting: Legal trophy hunting, illegal poaching and subsistence hunting for food.




The author wants to emphasise and contrast trophy hunting, which is legal, with poaching, which is illegal.






share|improve this answer
























  • Hares are classed as wild animals but still hunted for food not as a trophy...

    – Solar Mike
    3 hours ago











  • What is your point? Lots of animals are hunted for food.

    – James K
    3 hours ago



















1














The very definition of poaching contains the word "illegal", so it is a bit repetitive to say illegal poaching.




the illegal practice of trespassing on another's property to hunt or steal game without the landowner's permission.




Such repetitive constructions are used to add emphasis, but are not technically needed.






share|improve this answer























    Your Answer








    StackExchange.ready(function() {
    var channelOptions = {
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "481"
    };
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
    createEditor();
    });
    }
    else {
    createEditor();
    }
    });

    function createEditor() {
    StackExchange.prepareEditor({
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
    convertImagesToLinks: false,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: null,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader: {
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    },
    noCode: true, onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    });


    }
    });














    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function () {
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fell.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f199258%2fis-there-a-legal-poaching%23new-answer', 'question_page');
    }
    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes








    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    3














    Poaching is always illegal, so the adjective "illegal" is redundant. There is a (rare) word to describe this kind of redundancy: "Pleonastic". It means using more words than needed.



    Many style guides recommend reducing redundancy in your writing: You should say "tuna" not "tuna fish". You should not say "the two twins" (since twins implies two) you do not need to say "new innovations" (since innovations are always new).



    But pleonastic expressions are not ungrammatical, and some are very common and natural, especially in speech or less formal writing. Sometimes a writer will use a redundant word to emphasise a point.




    There are three types of hunting: Legal trophy hunting, illegal poaching and subsistence hunting for food.




    The author wants to emphasise and contrast trophy hunting, which is legal, with poaching, which is illegal.






    share|improve this answer
























    • Hares are classed as wild animals but still hunted for food not as a trophy...

      – Solar Mike
      3 hours ago











    • What is your point? Lots of animals are hunted for food.

      – James K
      3 hours ago
















    3














    Poaching is always illegal, so the adjective "illegal" is redundant. There is a (rare) word to describe this kind of redundancy: "Pleonastic". It means using more words than needed.



    Many style guides recommend reducing redundancy in your writing: You should say "tuna" not "tuna fish". You should not say "the two twins" (since twins implies two) you do not need to say "new innovations" (since innovations are always new).



    But pleonastic expressions are not ungrammatical, and some are very common and natural, especially in speech or less formal writing. Sometimes a writer will use a redundant word to emphasise a point.




    There are three types of hunting: Legal trophy hunting, illegal poaching and subsistence hunting for food.




    The author wants to emphasise and contrast trophy hunting, which is legal, with poaching, which is illegal.






    share|improve this answer
























    • Hares are classed as wild animals but still hunted for food not as a trophy...

      – Solar Mike
      3 hours ago











    • What is your point? Lots of animals are hunted for food.

      – James K
      3 hours ago














    3












    3








    3







    Poaching is always illegal, so the adjective "illegal" is redundant. There is a (rare) word to describe this kind of redundancy: "Pleonastic". It means using more words than needed.



    Many style guides recommend reducing redundancy in your writing: You should say "tuna" not "tuna fish". You should not say "the two twins" (since twins implies two) you do not need to say "new innovations" (since innovations are always new).



    But pleonastic expressions are not ungrammatical, and some are very common and natural, especially in speech or less formal writing. Sometimes a writer will use a redundant word to emphasise a point.




    There are three types of hunting: Legal trophy hunting, illegal poaching and subsistence hunting for food.




    The author wants to emphasise and contrast trophy hunting, which is legal, with poaching, which is illegal.






    share|improve this answer













    Poaching is always illegal, so the adjective "illegal" is redundant. There is a (rare) word to describe this kind of redundancy: "Pleonastic". It means using more words than needed.



    Many style guides recommend reducing redundancy in your writing: You should say "tuna" not "tuna fish". You should not say "the two twins" (since twins implies two) you do not need to say "new innovations" (since innovations are always new).



    But pleonastic expressions are not ungrammatical, and some are very common and natural, especially in speech or less formal writing. Sometimes a writer will use a redundant word to emphasise a point.




    There are three types of hunting: Legal trophy hunting, illegal poaching and subsistence hunting for food.




    The author wants to emphasise and contrast trophy hunting, which is legal, with poaching, which is illegal.







    share|improve this answer












    share|improve this answer



    share|improve this answer










    answered 3 hours ago









    James KJames K

    37.3k13891




    37.3k13891













    • Hares are classed as wild animals but still hunted for food not as a trophy...

      – Solar Mike
      3 hours ago











    • What is your point? Lots of animals are hunted for food.

      – James K
      3 hours ago



















    • Hares are classed as wild animals but still hunted for food not as a trophy...

      – Solar Mike
      3 hours ago











    • What is your point? Lots of animals are hunted for food.

      – James K
      3 hours ago

















    Hares are classed as wild animals but still hunted for food not as a trophy...

    – Solar Mike
    3 hours ago





    Hares are classed as wild animals but still hunted for food not as a trophy...

    – Solar Mike
    3 hours ago













    What is your point? Lots of animals are hunted for food.

    – James K
    3 hours ago





    What is your point? Lots of animals are hunted for food.

    – James K
    3 hours ago













    1














    The very definition of poaching contains the word "illegal", so it is a bit repetitive to say illegal poaching.




    the illegal practice of trespassing on another's property to hunt or steal game without the landowner's permission.




    Such repetitive constructions are used to add emphasis, but are not technically needed.






    share|improve this answer




























      1














      The very definition of poaching contains the word "illegal", so it is a bit repetitive to say illegal poaching.




      the illegal practice of trespassing on another's property to hunt or steal game without the landowner's permission.




      Such repetitive constructions are used to add emphasis, but are not technically needed.






      share|improve this answer


























        1












        1








        1







        The very definition of poaching contains the word "illegal", so it is a bit repetitive to say illegal poaching.




        the illegal practice of trespassing on another's property to hunt or steal game without the landowner's permission.




        Such repetitive constructions are used to add emphasis, but are not technically needed.






        share|improve this answer













        The very definition of poaching contains the word "illegal", so it is a bit repetitive to say illegal poaching.




        the illegal practice of trespassing on another's property to hunt or steal game without the landowner's permission.




        Such repetitive constructions are used to add emphasis, but are not technically needed.







        share|improve this answer












        share|improve this answer



        share|improve this answer










        answered 3 hours ago









        JPhi1618JPhi1618

        1113




        1113






























            draft saved

            draft discarded




















































            Thanks for contributing an answer to English Language Learners Stack Exchange!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid …



            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fell.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f199258%2fis-there-a-legal-poaching%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            -

            Popular posts from this blog

            SQL Server 17 - Attemping to backup to remote NAS but Access is denied

            Image
            .everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty{ margin-bottom:0; } 0 I was attemping to use Ola Hallengrens scripts to backup to a remote NAS, but it was failing and not giving any direct errors, so I tried doing it manually using Server Management Studio and got the following error: TITLE: Microsoft SQL Server Management Studio Failed to retrieve data for this request. (Microsoft.SqlServer.Management.Sdk.Sfc) For help, click: http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink?ProdName=Microsoft%20SQL%20Server&LinkId=20476 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: An exception occurred while executing a Transact-SQL statement or batch. (Microsoft.SqlServer.ConnectionInfo) The operating system returned the error '0x80070005(Access is denied.)&#
            Read more

            Always On Availability groups resolving state after failover - Remote harden of transaction...

            Image
            0 My explanation will be opinion based as it is based on my findings. If more information is needed, I am always happy to add it. The setup We have 4 SQL Server 2016 Instances, and all 4 underlying servers are in a WSFC (In my eyes a strange setup since Always On AG's are 2 by 2. But that is a different question.) 4 nodes + Fileshare witness Version: 13.0.5026.0 (all nodes) The instances that are having the failover issues are instances 1 & 2. They have 3 AG's between them. AG1 is primary on instance 1 and is having the issue. AG2 and AG3 are primary on instance 2. Instances 3 and 4 have their own separate AG's (2). AG1's settings The week before Last week, after checking for long running queries (none) and the synchronization state (green accross the board) we initiated a
            Read more

            Restoring from pg_dump with foreign key constraints

            Image
            5 2 In restoring a database from a pg_dump , a number of errors are being generated and the whole table is subsequently being ignored. An example: ERROR: insert or update on table "channelproducts" violates foreign key constraint "fk_rails_dfaae373a5" DETAIL: Key (channel_id)=(1) is not present in table "channels". Interestingly enough, I've noted that all these instances are popping up because of the sequence of loading. channels is after channelproducts both alphabetically and in the file and thus I can understand why postgres complains about having to create a child without a parent. caveat: the foreign key is being generated automatically by rails 4.2: I could remove the problem at the source but that still does not really solve the problem... version: PostgreSQL
            Read more