Reference for Bava Kamma 134:12

אי כתב רחמנא הכי הוה אמינא עד דגניב תרי וטבח להו וטבחו כתיב לחד

would otherwise be superfluous? Shall we say that 'ox and sheep' of the concluding clause would be superfluous, and the Divine Law should have written 'if a man shall steal an ox or a sheep and slaughter it or sell it, he should restore five oxen instead of it and four sheep instead of it'? Were the Divine Law to have thus written, would I not have thought that he should pay nine for each of them? And should you rejoin that it is written 'instead of it', 'instead of it' [twice in the text, so that] one 'instead of it' would then have been superfluous,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [I.e., if we were to assume that there is a payment of nine in each case.] ');">¹²</span>

Jastrow