A number of words and permutations of words are unwarranted, some others are repetitious, and several include one-word equivalents. According to one San Francisco Translator, legalistic language is a common culprit: “This is to advise you that we have” (We have is sufficient); “for the total amount of” (for); “in the situation that” (if); “on the scenario of” (on); “just before the start of” (before). Redundancy is a fairly less significant downside: “Noticeable to the eye” (visible is enough-there isn’t anything that can be seen by the ear); “encircled on all sides” (encircled suggests on all sides). Relative pronouns including who, that, and which frequently result in clutter, and occasionally even articles are too much (primarily too many the’s).
Nevertheless, well-positioned relative pronouns and articles carry out an essential purpose by avoiding bewilderment. As an example, without that, the subsequent sentence is unclear:
Complicated: The director informed the designers the other day that the requirements were modified.
Clear: The engineer informed the designers the other day that the requirements were altered.
Clear: The director informed the engineers that the other day the features were adjusted.