Whether Verbal or Visual, Affirmative or Negative, Tautologies are Not Tautologies

In this paper we test the hypothesis that tautologies (An X is an X; X is X) are actually not tautologies (i.e., not repetitive). Indeed, when exploring natural language use, it seems that, having expressed such “uninformative” statements, speakers, most often, spell out their specific intended interpretation, rendering these messages informative (Section 2). Visual/pictorial tautologies are also informative; either they allow the observers to come up with their own interpretation, or often, the artists use language to spell out the intended message (Section 3). Whether in language or in picture, artists tend to deautomatize the familiar, thereby rendering tautologies Optimally Innovative. Additionally, they often produce tautologies that convey figurative messages, whether metaphorical or sarcastic, thus allowing these tautologies to be highly creative (Section 5). Tautologies, then, communicate innovative messages, even when implicitly so. In fact, tautologies may often covertly reject the default salient meaning, while explicitly enlarging on it by using a novel, nondefault alternative.