I have two sentences which are almost similar: 1) We can say that the annals literally teem with biased descriptions of escaping hostile rulers or entire communities. and 2) We can say that the annals literally teem with biased descriptions of escaping hostile rulers or of entire communities. My question is whether it is necessary to repeat "of" (in bold here).
closed as off-topic by FumbleFingers, michael_timofeev, Nathaniel, tchrist♦, Roaring Fish Nov 29 '15 at 8:52
This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:
- "Please include the research you've done, or consider if your question suits our English Language Learners site better. Questions that can be answered using commonly-available references are off-topic." – FumbleFingers, michael_timofeev, Nathaniel, tchrist, Roaring Fish
It's a free choice.
Omitting the second of yields a coordination of two NPs as complement to the first of preposition:
 The annals literally teem with biased descriptions of [escaping hostile rulers] or [entire communities].
Include the second of and instead you have a coordination of two PPs as complement to the NP biased descriptions:
 The annals literally teem with biased descriptions [of escaping hostile rulers] or [of entire communities].
 is of course the logical equivalent of .
"We can say that" is unnecessary and a little confusing. Who are "we"? "Literally teem" is simply incorrect. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/teem
A more clear and straightforward sentence might read as follows: "The annals are full of biased descriptions of escaping hostile rulers and of entire communities that have fled."