Quote:
1. This is as much unnecessary as it is undesirable.
2. This is as unnecessary as it is undesirable.
|
I would say that since the construction 'as X as it is Y' already implies 'as much X as it is Y', the 'much' is redundant.
Moreover, we are not literally comparing two qualities in terms of degree or quantity: no one who uses #2, for instance, is comparing 'this' quantity of unnecessariness with 'that' quantity of undesirability. The comparison is rhetorical: a comparative figure of speech is used to convey a non-comparative message. It really means little more than:
2a. This is unnecessary; furthermore, it is undesirable.
(Or rather, vice versa.)
But cf. this construction:
3. You are as much to blame as I am.
Here, there is a sense of real comparison: we use it in situations where we really do want to apportion blame equally between two parties. (Or rather, to emphasise that party B is by no means blame-free.)
My impression is that the pattern of #3 has spilt over into #2, and produced #1.
That said, 'emphasis' may also be a legitimate explanation, in some contexts, e.g.
A: "This is as unnecessary as it is undesirable."
B: "Oh, surely not. Undesirable, yes, very much so; but unnecessary? In my view, it is much less unnecessary than it is undesirable."
A: "I strongly disagree. In my opinion, it is as much unnecessary as undesirable. More so, in fact."
Though perhaps such contexts are rare.
MrP