crowded with a lot of people

[balakrishnanijk]

I have often come across the expression "crowded with a lot of people."
Isn't it enough to say "The hall was crowded"? Why should we add "with a lot of people" to it?
Another:
He lost his composure and equanimity.
In view of the fact that composure and equanimity mean almost the same thing, isn't it quite pointless to use them together at the same time?

[Harry Smith]

Originally Posted by balakrishnanijk

I have often come across the expression "crowded with a lot of people."
Isn't it enough to say "The hall was crowded"? Why should we add "with a lot of people" to it?
Another:
He lost his composure and equanimity.
In view of the fact that composure and equanimity mean almost the same thing, isn't it quite pointless to use them together at the same time?

"The hall was crowded with a lot of people" means "The hall was overcrowded."

[BobK]

Originally Posted by Niall Beag

...
Well, I didn't even know what "equanimity" was. It's not a word we use here (Scotland) a lot anyway. I suspect that this is something from the Indian tradition; as I understand it, Sanskrit rhetoric favoured saying things two or three times in slightly different ways and this has been borrowed into English by speakers of the north Indian languages.

Just to be clear, Niall's 'this' refers to the tendency to repeat, not to the word "equanimity" - which I (born and raised in the home counties) have heard (and used) quite frequently.

Incidentally, I'd hesitate to call it nearly synonymous with composure anyway. Composure is a temporary thing, that can be learnt; equanimity is more of a character trait.

b

[2006]

"The hall was crowded with a lot of people." is redundant, but 'The hall was crowded with people.' is not redundant. [crowded with people as opposed to crowded with (people and) other things]

I don't agree that "crowded with" (necessarily) means overcrowded.