Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

I'm more measured on this.

The "plain English campaign" often boils down to dumbing down copy and removing all words that a 12 year old might not know.

There are many terms, especially legal terms, which have a precise meaning and which are used for a reason.

Teach vocabulary and good English in schools!




I agree we should aim for good vocabulary and English, but we can't forget many who have English as second or third language, or were unable to get quite the same level of English from school.

When it's a statute or legal judgement I'm happy to see the necessary precision in terminology. When it's a passport application, or an electric bill I'll take the simplest terminology viable. So I can spent the least time skimming it and still get the right information. Much like writing for the web. :)

I don't regret the death of overly flowery Victorian formal business writing. Notwithstanding your views heretofore. :)


The average reading age in the UK is 9 years old. Are you proposing that the Gov.uk website be inaccessible to the population it serves?

Don't forget, unlike other websites and apps, people do not use Gov.uk of their free will. They are forced to use it, in the sense that it is the official source of information and services from the government.


Citation? I mean, I believe you (I teach in a university here :~ ) but I'd like to se it backed up.


In most cases, it is possible to convey the same information in a concise manner to the average person.

Just like with math, I get the impression that sometimes the level of jargon/legalese used is an attempt to differentiate oneself from the everyday person. The same information could theoretically be put forward in a way which is understandable to all, not just those with a degree.


It's difficult to convey the same information.

From experience, the information provided on gov.uk can be incorrect because it is simplified too much. Very important aspects are lost and it becomes misleading.

As the saying goes, simplify as much as possible, but not more.


> but not more

Where there is essential complexity, explain the complexity clearly and skillfully.

The book Style: Towards Clarity and Grace is a good instruction manual, especially for those who have read Strunk & White


Although note that there's a non-zero number of professional linguists and grammarians seem to consider Strunk & White to be prescriptivist nonsense that you're better off ignoring.


I'd be very interested in reading a critique of Strunk & White if you've got a link.

> prescriptivist

Isn't all advice on how to accomplish a goal going to be prescriptivist?




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: