It drives me nuts. “Weather” is surely enough. And don’t get me started on “rain event” …
Perhaps redundant, but I wouldn’t call it tautological.
It would be a tautology if the words were complete synonyms. “Conditions” can mean “weather” but not necessarily. Hence why the adjective “weather” is included.
You could tell someone that you’re going on a trip east tomorrow and you want to know the conditions. They would then ask if you meant weather conditions (will it rain), road conditions (are the roads east well-maintained), traffic conditions (is construction planned to fix those crappy roads) and so on.
I agree with Alley Dweller that it is redundant in the sense that you could just say “weather” and the term “conditions” would be implied, but since the reverse isn’t true it’s not tautological.
Were you to ask what the meteorological weather conditions are, THAT would be a tautology, since “meteorological” and “weather” are synonymous as adjectives and you could eliminate either without changing your meaning.
Good point. Should I reword the question?
‘Conditions’ is a little bit redundant in the term ‘weather conditions’, but it’s not a tautology because there are other kinds of ‘conditions’.
If someone told me they’re travelling to Berzerkistan tomorrow and asked ‘what are the conditions like?’, they might mean a whole range of different conditions - Weather, Social/cultural/Political, Economic, Environmental (not necessarily the same as weather), terrain, etc.
Also, I would say ‘weather conditions’ (what’s the weather like) is a little distinct from ‘weather forecast’ (what’s the weather going to be like) and ‘climate’ (are the weather conditions and forecast typical of the region?)
Weather is whether or not it snowed last night. Conditions is whether or not they’ve plowed your street.
Which would be important to know for a ram trying to find his balls.
In the context one would use the term “weather conditions” it is obviously tautological. If you are about to discuss the weather, the term “conditions” is clearly already part of the term “weather,” which in that context literally means “the conditions to be found outside regarding atmosphere and precipitation.”
Something is not a tautology just when you use two perfect synonyms. It is a tautology if a word is redundant because its meaning is already expressed, even if that meaning is only part of an associated word or phrase’s meaning. “Conditions” are part of this definition of “weather,” so the phrase is tautological, just as “female widow” is tautological. “Female” and “widow” are not synonyms but “female” is an unavoidable part of the definition of “widow”, so the phrase is tautological, as are
“Completely surrounded”
“Free gift”
“Frozen ice”