Putting It (Even More) Plainly

   

Before we can make the most of plain language, we need to know what it is, what it isn’t and why it’s important in certain types of writing. The article "Putting It Plainly" addresses all of these questions and introduces some reliable pointers for turning the gumbo of gobbledygook into readable English. Now we’ll put each pointer to work by applying it to real-life sentences and passages.

Be concise

Eliminating wordiness is like straining spaghetti: we’ve got to dump the water but keep the pasta. Meaningless words drain away when we use simple modifiers and cut redundancies and empty phrases, as in this example:

Notice also that the "after" version splits the ideas into two sentences and introduces we and you, concrete, personal words the reader can relate to.

The next revision uses possessive forms to save words and eliminates the redundancy of aware and alert. (Our love of words in threes can lure us into a fair amount of redundancy.)

Use simple words

Sadly, no matter where we turn, we can be ambushed by the volleys of syllables that come from inflated, bureaucratic prose. Short, familiar words are the best defence.

As we’ve seen already, casting a passage in the first or second person can pave the way for simpler language:

Avoid negatives

The previous revision does more than just simplify the words; it conveys the ideas using positive rather than negative language. In other words, it tells the reader what is rather than what isn’t. Steer clear of negatives whenever you can, especially when they are piled on top of one another.

Use concrete words

Precise, concrete words that allow readers to visualize help to convey meaning quickly and easily. General, abstract words, on the other hand, are hard to pin down. Consider this passage:

• Again, we should not be limited to only one scenario or adaptation strategy. We must reflect the diversity of the different sensitivities and the different adaptive capacity that exists within the natural system and also in the interface between the human and natural systems.

What on earth does this mean? Between scenarios and adaptation strategies, natural systems and adaptive capacities, there are no concrete images to fasten on. Airy and ungraspable, the passage slips away from us like an untethered balloon.

Often the only way to improve abstract language is to ask yourself—or the writer, if that’s not you—what the text is really trying to say. Some passages, like the one above, are so vague that we can’t translate them into plain language without more information.

Here’s another example that cries out for more concrete language, not to mention an overall trim:

Avoid weak verbs

The previous example also illustrates the power of a few good verbs. Weak verbs like be and have, which most writers overuse, tend to travel with wordy companions—long, abstract nouns, which interestingly are often derived from verbs. Rubbing out the weak-verb + noun combo and substituting a more precise verb is a key plain language technique.

Remember the reader

Plain language means more than just choosing words carefully; it also means writing to meet the reader’s needs. Documents that fail to take their audience into account can miss the mark no matter how clear their language.

I was reminded of this axiom years ago, when an email from Air Canada turned up in my inbox. "Concerning your upcoming flight" was the subject line. I did have a flight booked, so this was a good lead-in. It caught my attention and told me why I should read on.

But that was where the plain language ended. The body of the email announced that within a few days Air Canada would introduce Onboard Café, an exciting new service that would offer an array of meals and snacks for sale. If I needed more information, I was told, I could visit Air Canada’s website.

Well, I did need more information. The email had overlooked a basic question—to me, the most important question. Was Onboard Café simply expanding the existing selection of for-sale food items (cheerfully hawked as "movie snacks") on long-haul flights? Or was it replacing the traditional offering of hot, and more importantly free, foil-wrapped entrees that I, like most travellers, had come to depend on?

I visited Air Canada’s website hoping for clarification. Here’s what I got:

• Our new Onboard Café offers choice, value and greater flexibility. You decide what meal-type to purchase onboard. We are pleased to offer our Hospitality Service customers with [sic] a popular new innovative menu of reasonably priced items. Enjoy a tasty sandwich, hot pizza or simply indulge on [sic] a popular snack, the choice is all yours. This new service is now offered on all Continental North American flight [sic] of 1h30 [sic] or longer (Hawaiian and Mexican destinations excluded).

The words in this passage are easy to understand (though occasionally redundant); the sentences are short (though badly punctuated); the ideas are clear (though somewhat disorganized). Yet as a communication, the document failed. My number-one question as a reader was answered nowhere.

In the end it took an email to Air Canada to extract the news that, as air travellers now know, the pay-as-you-go service would replace the free meals. Why didn’t the airline’s documents say as much? I’d wager that someone decided it’s bad PR to tell people they’re losing something that once was free; it’s better to tell them they’re getting something new. Is that sound PR? Maybe. Is it plain language? Nope. Air Canada’s documents were writer-centred, serving the airline’s needs instead of the reader’s, and because of that they communicated badly.

There may be no more free meals, but here’s some free advice: remember your readers and always write for them. That’s the essence of plain language.

   

© Services publics et Approvisionnement Canada, 2024
TERMIUM Plus^®, la banque de données terminologiques et linguistiques du gouvernement du Canada
Outils d'aide à la rédaction – Peck's English Pointers
Un produit du Bureau de la traduction