Is it redundant to say something "must be necessarily..."?

Question

Is the combined use of must be and necessarily here redundant?

Your appearance must be necessarily maintained.

I want this statement to be sardonic, so simply "Your appearance must be maintained" doesn't cut it. I want to mock the pressure to maintain your appearance.

Is necessarily a redundant adjective here, even though it doesn't relate directly to the must be part of the sentence? Is it the wrong adjective?

Answer 1

Must+necessarily is common for emphasis. It may sometimes be overkill, but can clarify meaning.

Must has several meanings - it can mean

1. something is necessary by logic or natural law ("You must complete the circuit to turn on the light." "If A is true then not-A must be false.")
2. something is required by statute or regulation ("You must walk on designated paths.")
3. denote a strong recommendation ("You must read this book.")
4. denote an inference ("I can smell food. It must be time for dinner.")
5. denote something that is likely to be true ("He must have known what would happen if he broke the rules.")

Saying "must necessarily" explains that necessity is intended, not a strong suggestion, inference, or command.

Of course, there is often a way to rephrase without using must and necessarily, and in some case it may be pleonastic, but even then it might be used for emphasis.

For instance, from The Economist: "The presumption that big businesses must necessarily be wicked is plain wrong." Here "necessarily" indicates there is a necessary logical connection between big business and wickedness (or here the absence of one), while without necessarily, "big business must be wicked" could be an instruction, an inference, or a statement of probability (the common inference that big business is probably wicked).

As to the specific example, "Your appearance must be necessarily maintained" doesn't sound very idiomatic. I would prefer "Your appearance must necessarily be maintained." In either case, "necessarily" indicates that there is an absolute logical or physical requirement for appearance to be maintained, rather than a mere suggestion or a command (of the sort that might be ignored). It doesn't make a great deal of sense, but I gather that is the intention.

Answer 2

I used "necessarily must" in a tweet today, which brought me to here after I posted it.

It was in the context of, "you must read this article" but I added the "necessarily" because there was a layer of context for students of the subject having a necessity to read it.

"Must" was a recommendation to all; "necessarily" was that it's more than a recommendation to students (or indeed any thinker).

So "necessarily" modified "must" from being a necessity to being a word of enthusiastic recommendation.

In other words, "must" became "if you're interested" and not mandatory wholly because I had added "necessarily".

It's because people commonly say "you must see this movie." No movie is a necessity. The degradation of "must" requires sometimes for it to be strengthened.

Unfortunately, this becomes circular, because my "necessarily" is both strengthening and weakening my "must".

I should have, simply, used different words.