Why Should You Use Plain Language? | Hacker News Reader

Why Should You Use Plain Language?

hsph.harvard.edu

40 pointsreazalun12 comments

Whilst we're on the topic, here is a quote from Yes Minister (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yes_minister):

"The identity of the official whose alleged responsibility for this hypothetical oversight has been the subject of recent discussion is not shrouded in quite such impenetrable obscurity as certain previous disclosures may have led you to assume, but, not to put too fine a point on it, the individual in question is, it may surprise you to learn, one whom your present interlocutor is in the habit of defining by means of the perpendicular pronoun."

Translation: "It's me."

I highly recommend this read. Among the examples, you'll see plenty of (sadly) typical, overcomplicated phrases, that can often be replaced with a single word. The article also goes into presentation, such as the use of tables.

I hope many people take this to heart, because I've seen a lot of despicable writing over the years. I'd love to see more simple, direct language.

"You do not really understand something unless you can explain it to your grandmother."

– Albert Einstein

My grandmother is dead, you insensitive clod!

I have a dream. It is a dream that one day EULA will be written in a plain language.

The problem is that plain language is full of loopholes and double meanings. Legalese is hard to understand, but it tries to be precise and loophole-free.

Yeah it's true generally. However, check the EULA of Google Desktop: http://desktop.google.com/eula.html

The word "shall" in it can be replaced with "must" to make it more plain.

Edit: This is some of the advice from the article: The use of "shall" creates confusion. To impose a legal obligation, use "must." To predict future action, use "will."

Yes, though legal language is mostly still full of loopholes. Unfortunately.

All good advice, except:

f) Avoid using gender-specific terminology

The convoluted language necessary to do this can make things worse. This sounds more like being politically correct than anything else.

Also, I personally hate chapter headings stated in the form of questions. Whenever I see that, I know the next section will be full of useless "don't worry" platitudes.

A lot of the convolution goes away if you embrace the third-person singular "they". It sounds odd at first but I'm slowly adjusting to it as I hear it more and more.

http://www.bartleby.com/141/, III especially.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com