Hubbry Logo
JargonJargonMain
Open search
Jargon
Community hub
Jargon
logo
7 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Jargon
Jargon
Jargon
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

Jargon, or technical language, is the specialized terminology associated with a particular field or area of activity.[1] Jargon is normally employed in a particular communicative context and may not be well understood outside that context. The context is usually a particular occupation (that is, a certain trade, profession, vernacular or academic field), but any ingroup can have jargon. The key characteristic that distinguishes jargon from the rest of a language is its specialized vocabulary, which includes terms and definitions of words that are unique to the context, and terms used in a narrower and more exact sense than when used in colloquial language. This can lead outgroups to misunderstand communication attempts. Jargon is sometimes understood as a form of technical slang and then distinguished from the official terminology used in a particular field of activity.[2]

The terms jargon, slang, and argot are not consistently differentiated in the literature; different authors interpret these concepts in varying ways. According to one definition, jargon differs from slang in being secretive in nature;[3] according to another understanding, it is specifically associated with professional and technical circles.[4] Some sources, however, treat these terms as synonymous.[5][6] The use of jargon became more popular around the sixteenth century attracting persons from different career paths. This led to there being printed copies available on the various forms of jargon.[7]

Specifics

[edit]

Jargon, also referred to as "technical language", is "the technical terminology or characteristic idiom of a special activity or group".[8] Most jargon is technical terminology (technical terms), involving terms of art[9] or industry terms, with particular meaning within a specific industry. The primary driving forces in the creation of technical jargon are precision, efficiency of communication, and professionalism.[10] Terms and phrases that are considered jargon have meaningful definitions, and through frequency of use, can become catchwords.[11]

While jargon allows greater efficiency in communication among those familiar with it, jargon also raises the threshold of comprehensibility for outsiders.[12] This is usually accepted[citation needed] as an unavoidable trade-off but it may also be used as a means of social exclusion (reinforcing ingroup–outgroup barriers) or social aspiration (when introduced as a way of demonstrating expertise). Some academics promote the use of jargon-free language, or plain language,[13] as an audience may be alienated or confused by the technical terminology, and thus lose track of a speaker or writer's broader and more important arguments.[14]

Some words with both a technical and a non-technical meaning are referred to as semi-technical vocabulary: for example, Chinh Ngan Nguyen Le and Julia Miller refer to colon as an anatomical term and also a punctuation mark;[15] and Derek Matravers refers to person and its plural form persons as technical language used in philosophy, where their meaning is more specific than "person" and "people" in their everyday use.[16]

Etymology

[edit]

The French word is believed to have been derived from the Latin word gaggire, meaning "to chatter", which was used to describe speech that the listener did not understand.[17] The word may also come from Old French jargon meaning "chatter of birds".[17] Middle English also has the verb jargounen meaning "to chatter", or "twittering", deriving from Old French.[18]

The Canterbury Tales by Geoffrey Chaucer is the first known use of the term "jargon" in English literature.

The first known use of the word in English is found within The Canterbury Tales, written by Geoffrey Chaucer between 1387 and 1400. Chaucer related "jargon" to the vocalizations of birds.[18]

In colonial history, jargon was seen as a device of communication to bridge the gap between two speakers who did not speak the same tongue. Jargon was synonymous with pidgin in naming specific language usages. Jargon then began to have a negative connotation with lacking coherent grammar, or gibberish as it was seen as a "broken" language of many different languages with no full community to call their own. In the 1980s, linguists began restricting this usage of jargon to keep the word to more commonly define a technical or specialized language use.[19]

Fields using the term

[edit]

In linguistics, it is used to mean "specialist language",[20] with the term also seen as closely related to slang, argot and cant.[21] Various kinds of language peculiar to ingroups can be named across a semantic field. Slang can be either culture-wide or known only within a certain group or subculture. Argot is slang or jargon purposely used to obscure meaning to outsiders. Conversely, a lingua franca is used for the opposite effect, helping communicators to overcome unintelligibility, as are pidgins and creole languages. For example, the Chinook Jargon was a pidgin.[22] Although technical jargon's primary purpose is to aid technical communication, not to exclude outsiders by serving as an argot, it can have both effects at once and can provide a technical ingroup with shibboleths. For example, medieval guilds could use this as one means of informal protectionism. On the other hand, jargon that once was obscure outside a small ingroup can become generally known over time. For example, the terms bit, byte, and hexadecimal (which are terms from computing jargon[23]) are now recognized by many people[who?] outside computer science.[citation needed]

Referenced

[edit]

The philosopher Étienne Bonnot de Condillac observed in 1782 that "every science requires a special language because every science has its own ideas". As a rationalist member of the Enlightenment, he continued: "It seems that one ought to begin by composing this language, but people begin by speaking and writing, and the language remains to be composed."[24]

Industry term

[edit]

An industry word is a specialized kind of technical terminology used in a certain industry. Industry words and phrases are often used in a specific area, and those in that field know and use the terminology.[25]

Precise technical terms and their definitions are formally recognized, documented, and taught by educators in the field. Other terms are more colloquial, coined and used by practitioners in the field, and are similar to slang. The boundaries between formal and slang jargon, as in general English, are quite fluid. This is especially true in the rapidly developing world of computers and networking. For instance, the term firewall (in the sense of a device used to filter network traffic) was at first technical slang. As these devices became more widespread and the term became widely understood, the word was adopted as formal terminology.[26]

Technical terminology evolves due to the need for experts in a field to communicate with precision and brevity but often has the effect of excluding those who are unfamiliar with the particular specialized language of the group.[27] This can cause difficulties, for example, when a patient is unable to follow the discussions of medical practitioners, and thus cannot understand his own condition and treatment. Differences in jargon also cause difficulties where professionals in related fields use different terms for the same phenomena.[28]

Corporate jargon

[edit]

The use of jargon in the business world is a common occurrence. The use of jargon in business correspondence reached a high popularity between the late 1800s into the 1950s.[29] In this context, jargon is most frequently used in modes of communication such as emails, reports, and other forms of documentation.[30] Common phrases used in corporate jargon include:

Medical jargon

[edit]

Medicine professionals make extensive use of scientific terminology. Most patients encounter medical jargon when referring to their diagnosis or when receiving or reading their medication.[34] Some commonly used terms in medical jargon are:

At first glance, many people do not understand what these terms mean and may panic when they see these scientific names being used in reference to their health.[41] The argument as to whether medical jargon is a positive or negative attribute of a patient's experience has evidence to support both sides. On one hand, as mentioned before, these phrases can be overwhelming for some patients who may not understand the terminology. However, with the accessibility of the internet, it has been suggested that these terms can be used and easily researched for clarity.[34]

[edit]

Jargon is commonly found in the field of law. These terms are often used in legal contexts such as legal documents, court proceedings, contracts, and more. Some common terms in this profession include:

  • Acquittal
  • Affidavit[42]
  • Adjudication
  • Libel
  • Litigation
  • Tort[43]

Education jargon

[edit]

There is specialized terminology within the field of education. Educators and administrators use these terms to communicate ideas specific to the education system. Common terms and acronyms considered to be jargon that are used within this profession include:

In practice

[edit]

Jargon may serve the purpose of a "gatekeeper" in conversation, signaling who is allowed into certain forms of conversation. Jargon may serve this function by dictating to which direction or depth a conversation about or within the context of a certain field or profession will go.[44] For example, a conversation between two professionals in which one person has little previous interaction or knowledge of the other person could go one of at least two possible ways. One of the professionals (who the other professional does not know) does not use, or does not correctly use the jargon of their respective field, and is little regarded or remembered beyond small talk or fairly insignificant in this conversation. Or, if the person does use particular jargon (showing their knowledge in the field to be legitimate, educated, or of particular significance) the other professional then opens the conversation up in an in-depth or professional manner.[44] The use of jargon can create a divide in communication, or strengthen it. Outside of conversation, jargon can become confusing in writing. When used in text, readers can become confused if there are terms used that require outside knowledge on the subject.[45]

Positivity

[edit]

Ethos is used to create an appeal to authority. It is one of three pillars of persuasion created by Aristotle to create a logical argument. Ethos uses credibility to back up arguments. It can indicate to the audience that a speaker is an insider with using specialized terms in the field to make an argument based on authority and credibility.[46]

Jargon can be used to convey meaningful information and discourse in a convenient way within communities. A subject expert may wish to avoid jargon when explaining something to a layperson. Jargon may help communicate contextual information optimally.[47] For example, a football coach talking to their team or a doctor working with nurses.[48]

Accessibility and criticism

[edit]

With the rise of the self-advocacy within the Disability Rights Movement, "jargonized" language has started to face repeated rejection for being language that is widely inaccessible.[49] However, jargon is largely present in everyday language such as in newspapers, financial statements, and instruction manuals. To combat this, several advocacy organizations are working on influencing public agents to offer accessible information in different formats.[50] One accessible format that offers an alternative to jargonized language is "easy read", which consists of a combination of plain language[13] and images.

The criticism against jargon can be found in certain fields where professionals communicate with individuals with no industry background. In a study done by analyzing 58 patients and 10 radiation therapists, professionals diagnosed and explained the treatment of a disease to a patient with the use of jargon. It was found that using jargon left patients confused about what the treatments and risks were, suggesting that jargon in the medical field is not the best in communicating the terminology and concepts.[51]

Quantification

[edit]

Jargon has been quantified using a piecewise mathematical function called jargonness, which maps the frequencies of appearance of a word in scientific and contemporary English corpora to a parameter—called jargonness itself—quantifying the word's association with scientific jargon.[52][53] It is expressed as:[53]

In the above equation, stands for the frequency of a word's appearance in a general English-language corpus and stands for its frequency in a scientific corpus.

Examples of corpora used in the determination of these frequencies include the Professional English Research Consortium Corpus (scientific) and the British National Corpus (common).[53]

Jargon glossaries

[edit]

Many examples of jargon exist because of its use among specialists and subcultures alike. In the professional world, those who are in the business of filmmaking may use words like "vorkapich" to refer to a montage when talking to colleagues.[54] In rhetoric, rhetoricians use words like "arete" to refer to a person of power's character when speaking with one another.[55]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]

Further reading

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Jargon

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
Jargon is specialized and phrasing peculiar to a particular , , group, or field of activity, enabling concise and precise expression among insiders while often rendering communication opaque or inaccessible to outsiders. The term derives from the mid-14th-century jargoun, originally denoting chattering or twittering sounds like those of birds, which evolved to signify unintelligible or gibberish-like speech before acquiring its modern sense of technical or in-group lingo. Within and , jargon functions as a shorthand system of terms, acronyms, and idioms tailored to domain-specific concepts, allowing experts to convey complex ideas efficiently without lengthy explanations—such as "bandwidth" in or "leverage" in beyond its literal meaning. However, its defining characteristics include exclusivity and potential for , where terms may prioritize brevity over clarity, fostering subcultural cohesion but hindering interdisciplinary exchange or public understanding. highlights jargon's : it enhances precision in technical , yet overuse correlates with reduced comprehension, increased perceived in messaging, and even signals of communicator insecurity rather than mastery. Notable controversies surrounding jargon center on its capacity to erect barriers in broader communication contexts, such as or interactions, where it can induce resistance to , inflate perceptions of , and exclude non-experts, thereby undermining trust and effective . Studies in demonstrate that while jargon evolves organically to meet practical needs—like specialized dialects in industrial or strategic fields—its persistence often stems from , including status signaling or deliberate , rather than pure , prompting calls for deliberate simplification in public-facing contexts without sacrificing accuracy. This tension underscores jargon's empirical trade-offs: a tool for causal in closed loops of expertise, yet a frequent culprit in miscommunication when causal chains extend to diverse audiences.

Definition and Distinctions

Core Definition and Characteristics

Jargon refers to the specialized , expressions, and sometimes syntactic conventions used by members of a particular , , , or to communicate ideas efficiently within that . This terminology is often incomprehensible to outsiders lacking the requisite background , as its meanings deviate from or extend beyond standard usage in general language. Core characteristics of jargon include its domain-specificity, where terms encapsulate complex concepts succinctly for insiders—such as "" in legal contexts denoting a sworn statement or "eigenvalue" in representing a scalar associated with a linear transformation. It functions as a that assumes shared expertise, promoting precision and reducing in professional , but this reliance on collective can foster exclusivity and hinder broader . Jargon evolves organically through repeated use in practical settings, often incorporating acronyms, abbreviations, or neologisms tailored to the group's needs, rather than through deliberate linguistic design. While jargon enables rapid transmission of nuanced among experts, its opacity to non-experts has drawn for potentially obscuring meaning or serving as a tool for gatekeeping, as evidenced in studies of scientific communication where specialized terms correlate with reduced comprehension. Nonetheless, empirical analyses affirm its utility in maintaining technical rigor, with surveys indicating that professionals in fields like or report jargon as essential for avoiding in high-stakes interactions. This dual nature—efficient yet exclusionary—stems from jargon's adaptation to causal demands of specialized environments, where general language proves insufficient for describing intricate processes or phenomena.

Differentiation from Slang, Acronyms, and Technical Terms

Jargon differs from primarily in its purpose, formality, and audience. consists of informal, colloquial expressions that evolve rapidly within social groups or subcultures, often carrying playful or subversive connotations and lacking precision for professional use. In contrast, jargon comprises specialized vocabulary and phrasing tailored to a particular or technical domain, enabling efficient communication among insiders while frequently excluding outsiders due to its context-specific meanings. Linguistic analyses emphasize that 's transient nature—driven by cultural trends—contrasts with jargon's relative stability, as the latter supports ongoing operational needs within established fields rather than casual social bonding. Acronyms, while often embedded within jargon, represent a narrower linguistic mechanism: abbreviations formed from initial letters of words or phrases, such as "DNA" for deoxyribonucleic acid, which prioritize brevity over conceptual depth. Jargon, however, extends beyond mere abbreviation to encompass a full system of terms, idioms, and syntactic patterns unique to a discipline, where acronyms serve as tools rather than the defining feature. For instance, in medicine, acronyms like "MRI" form part of broader jargon that includes procedural descriptions and diagnostic frameworks, illustrating how acronyms function as components of jargon's exclusionary lexicon without constituting it entirely. Technical terms overlap significantly with jargon but are distinguished by their intent for precision and universality within a field, whereas jargon often implies opaque or unnecessarily convoluted application that prioritizes group signaling over clarity. Dictionaries and style guides define technical terms as standardized nomenclature for concepts, such as "photosynthesis" in biology, designed for replicable knowledge transmission. Jargon, by extension, aggregates these terms into a dialect that can obscure meaning for non-experts, sometimes critiqued for fostering elitism; empirical studies in communication note that while technical terms enhance accuracy among peers, jargon's holistic use correlates with reduced accessibility in interdisciplinary contexts. This differentiation underscores jargon's role as a socio-professional barrier, rooted in causal dynamics of expertise silos rather than slang's egalitarian informality or acronyms' syntactic efficiency.

Etymology and Historical Development

Origins of the Term

The term jargon derives from jargoun or jargon, first attested around the , where it denoted the chattering of birds, warbling song, or unintelligible human speech resembling such sounds. This usage reflected an onomatopoeic origin, mimicking twittering or gabbling noises, and may trace further to gargō or related forms evoking throat-clearing or chatter, though direct Latin antecedents like garrīre ("to chatter") are debated among philologists. By the mid-14th century, the word entered via Anglo-Norman influences, retaining its pejorative sense of "," "idle talk," or "barbarous language" incomprehensible to outsiders, often applied to or foreign tongues. The records an early verb form jargonen (to chatter or warble) predating 1366 in the anonymous Romaunt of the Rose, a Chaucer-attributed work, signaling its adoption for describing meaningless or bird-like utterance. Its inaugural literary appearance in English prose or verse occurs in Geoffrey Chaucer's (c. 1387–1400), specifically in "," where jargon describes the "janglynge" or discordant speech of those eschewing plain truth for ornate verbiage: "And namely the cursedly janglynge and tricherie of worldly clergees." This usage underscores an early critique of obfuscatory , aligning with medieval views of jargon as both avian mimicry and human pretension, distinct from later specialized connotations. ![Illustration from Geoffrey Chaucer's The Canterbury Tales depicting narrative elements associated with early English usage of the term]float-right

Evolution Through Key Periods

The concept of jargon as specialized professional or trade language solidified in the 16th century, evolving from its earlier pejorative sense of unintelligible chatter or bird-like twittering introduced to English in the mid-1300s via Old French "jargoun," as seen in Geoffrey Chaucer's The Canterbury Tales. This shift reflected growing recognition of domain-specific terms in guilds and early professions, where such vocabulary protected trade secrets and facilitated intra-group communication, though often viewed suspiciously by outsiders as obfuscatory. During the (15th–16th centuries), scientific and medical fields accelerated jargon development through revival of Greek and Latin texts, incorporating influences like "alcohol" for distilled spirits; , rooted in Hippocratic Greek (c. 460–370 BC) with terms such as "" and "," was systematized in Latin by figures like and , forming a precise yet insular for and . In law and emerging sciences, printed glossaries and treatises began standardizing terms, bridging classical roots with adaptations to support expanding knowledge domains amid the . The 19th century, amid the , saw jargon proliferate in , , and , with business terminology tracing roots to this era's technological and organizational expansions, often borrowing from technical realms to denote efficiency in nascent corporate structures. jargon evolved further via neoclassical coinages like "" and eponyms, reflecting rapid scientific advances, while legal jargon entrenched Anglo-French terms from the medieval period into codified statutes, prioritizing precision over accessibility. In the , particularly post-World War II, corporate and influences drove jargon into and , with terms like "implement" surging in usage—from 5 per 10,000 books in to 2 per 1,000 by 2000—as veterans adapted operational lingo to civilian enterprises; and scientific fields layered acronyms and neologisms for innovation, while transitioned from Latin dominance (ending formally in Britain by 1802) to English-led international standards, enhancing global collaboration but widening comprehension gaps. This era's bureaucratic growth amplified critiques of jargon as needlessly complex, yet its functional role in specialized efficiency persisted.

Functional Advantages

Precision and Efficiency for Experts

Specialized terminology enables experts within a domain to articulate complex, nuanced concepts with greater precision than general language permits, as it incorporates distinctions refined through iterative refinement and empirical validation in that field. For example, in physics, the term "" precisely denotes a measure of disorder or unavailable in a , avoiding the ambiguities inherent in broader descriptors like "disorder" alone, which could conflate unrelated phenomena. This precision stems from jargon evolving as a compressed tailored to the causal structures and observables central to the discipline, facilitating unambiguous reference to entities and processes. Efficiency arises because jargon functions as a high-bandwidth , reducing the cognitive and temporal costs of communication among those versed in the domain. Linguistic studies indicate that human languages optimize for communicative by shortening frequent or predictable terms, a extended in jargon where domain-specific words encapsulate multifaceted ideas that would otherwise demand lengthy expositions; for instance, conveying "" in statistics requires far fewer words than outlining its probabilistic updating mechanism from scratch. In professional settings like or , this allows rapid exchange of critical information—such as "" signaling low blood oxygen levels—potentially averting errors in high-stakes scenarios where verbosity could delay action. Empirical analysis of lexicons supports that such optimizations enhance overall rates within expert groups. Moreover, jargon fosters collaborative innovation by presupposing shared foundational knowledge, thereby streamlining discourse toward novel applications rather than rote explanations. In scientific teams, this efficiency correlates with accelerated problem-solving, as evidenced by the development of domain-specific glossaries in fields like bioinformatics, where terms like "" enable quick alignment on computational methods without redundant tutorials. However, this benefit hinges on communal adoption and training, underscoring jargon's role as an emergent tool for causal modeling and prediction within bounded expertise communities.

Facilitation of Specialized Knowledge and Innovation

Jargon provides experts with a precise and efficient mechanism for communicating complex ideas, encapsulating multifaceted concepts into concise terms that reduce ambiguity and cognitive overhead in professional discourse. This shared vocabulary enables specialists to reference established knowledge rapidly, fostering cumulative progress in fields where nuanced distinctions are paramount, such as physics or engineering, by minimizing misinterpretation during collaboration. In the realm of innovation, the emergence of specialized terms often accompanies breakthroughs, standardizing novel constructs and allowing researchers to build iteratively upon them without redundant exposition. For instance, the introduction of terminology like "CRISPR-Cas9" in 2012 precisely denoted a gene-editing mechanism derived from bacterial immune systems, which accelerated advancements in by providing a common framework for experimental replication and refinement across laboratories worldwide. Similarly, standardized electrotechnical terms defined by bodies such as the (IEC) ensure consistent application in device design and , underpinning scalable innovations in power systems and since the organization's founding in 1906. Empirical support for jargon's role in knowledge facilitation comes from rehabilitation sciences, where uniform terminology has been shown to be essential for identifying problems, aggregating , and measuring outcomes, thereby enabling field-wide advancements through coordinated efforts. In technology sectors, terms such as ""—coined in the context of Bitcoin's 2008 whitepaper—have similarly standardized decentralized ledger concepts, spurring applications in finance and by allowing precise modeling and extension of underlying protocols. Overall, while excessive or poorly defined jargon can hinder broader accessibility, its judicious use among experts drives efficiency in hypothesis testing and prototype development, causal drivers of sustained .

Domains of Application

Scientific and Technical Jargon

Scientific and technical jargon comprises the specialized lexicon developed within disciplines such as physics, chemistry, , and to denote phenomena, processes, and entities with a degree of precision unattainable through terms. This vocabulary emerges as fields generate novel concepts requiring unambiguous designation, often drawing from Latin, Greek, or neologisms to encapsulate multifaceted ideas succinctly. For instance, in , the term "metazoan" precisely evokes multicellular organisms exhibiting and tissue organization, compressing extensive evolutionary and developmental knowledge into a single descriptor. Such terms enable scientists to reference shared understandings rapidly, fostering efficiency in discourse and documentation. In physics, jargon facilitates the articulation of counterintuitive realities; "quantum entanglement" describes correlated particle states where measurement of one instantaneously influences the other, irrespective of distance, a phenomenon formalized in since the 1930s. Similarly, engineering employs terms like "finite element analysis," a dividing complex structures into discrete elements to simulate stress and deformation, underpinning designs in and civil projects. These examples illustrate how jargon not only signals expertise but also structures thought, allowing practitioners to build upon prior work without redundant exposition—e.g., invoking "" invokes the biochemical pathway converting light to via , encompassing electron transport chains and Calvin cycles. The proliferation of such terminology correlates with disciplinary maturation; biology, for example, incorporates tens of thousands of domain-specific terms in peer-reviewed literature, reflecting the field's expansion since the mid-20th century amid molecular and genomic advances. While essential for intra-expert communication, this jargon demands apprenticeship—novices must master it through immersion in texts and training, as evidenced by glossaries in biomedical research exceeding 1,000 entries for core concepts alone. Empirical analyses confirm its utility: studies replacing jargon with lay equivalents in abstracts reduce citation rates by up to 20%, suggesting that precise terminology enhances perceived rigor and accessibility within specialist communities.

Professional, Corporate, and Bureaucratic Jargon

Professional jargon refers to the specialized , acronyms, and phrases used within specific occupational fields to convey concepts efficiently among practitioners, such as "" in legal contexts or "bandwidth" in IT management. Corporate jargon, a subset prevalent in settings, includes buzzwords like "," "leverage," and "circle back," which substitute for straightforward terms to emphasize strategic intent or . Bureaucratic jargon, characteristic of governmental and administrative discourse, features formal, impersonal constructions such as phrases (e.g., "it is recommended that action be taken") and euphemisms (e.g., "rightsizing" for layoffs), designed to maintain neutrality and procedural detachment. In corporate environments, jargon proliferates through communications and meetings, with terms like "boil the ocean" (attempting an overly ambitious task) or "low-hanging fruit" (easy gains) serving to signal insider knowledge and efficiency. A 2023 study found that such use correlates with perceived status within organizations, as speakers employing jargon are viewed as more competent by peers, though it risks alienating external stakeholders or junior employees unfamiliar with the . Bureaucratic variants appear in documents and reports, where linguistic —measured by factors like sentence length and abstract nouns—can obscure , as evidenced in analyses of administrative texts that prioritize impersonality over transparency. Empirical assessments indicate high prevalence: surveys of workplace communications reveal in over 70% of executive emails and presentations, often criticized for reducing clarity without adding substantive value. In bureaucratic settings, studies of nonprofit annual reports demonstrate that elevated text complexity inversely correlates with public support, suggesting intentional or inadvertent to mitigate . These practices persist due to institutional and signaling incentives, yet they frequently elicit backlash for fostering exclusion and inefficiency, as plain-language alternatives yield higher comprehension rates in cross-audience interactions.

Academic and Ideological Jargon

Academic jargon encompasses specialized terminology and phrasing endemic to scholarly disciplines, enabling concise expression of complex ideas among experts but often extending into ideological domains within the and social sciences, where terms embed normative assumptions about power, identity, and . In these fields, ideological jargon—such as "hegemonic ," "," "othering," and ""—frames analyses through lenses of systemic oppression and , drawing from and traditions that emphasize over objective reality. These terms, originating in works by thinkers like and (who coined "" in 1989 to describe overlapping discriminations), facilitate critique of established institutions but frequently prioritize rhetorical flourish over falsifiable claims. Criticisms of such jargon center on its role in , defined as the use or tolerance of opaque that impedes comprehension and scrutiny, particularly in ideological contexts where empirical rigor yields to coherence. Hard involves deliberate complexity to evade disconfirmation, while soft arises from habitual imprecision; both undermine discourse in fields like gender and , where prioritizes alignment with prevailing ideologies over methodological soundness. This opacity correlates with academia's documented left-leaning ideological skew, as surveys indicate ratios exceeding 10:1 favoring liberal over conservative faculty in social sciences, fostering environments where jargon signals rather than advances . Empirical demonstrations include the 1996 , in which physicist authored a fabricated article laden with postmodern jargon asserting that undermines Enlightenment rationality; the journal published it without detecting the parody, revealing vulnerabilities in ideological humanities publishing. Similarly, the 2017–2018 grievance studies project by James Lindsay, , and submitted 20 hoax papers to journals in feminist, , and ; seven were accepted or published, including a rewritten section of reframed as feminist praxis and a dog-park study advocating canine consent training, employing trendy jargon to mimic field norms and expose lax standards. These hoaxes, involving over 6,000 hours of effort, accepted papers in outlets like and Sexuality & Culture, underscoring how ideological jargon can camouflage pseudoscholarship. Proponents defend ideological jargon as essential for unpacking nuanced social constructs inaccessible to lay language, arguing that accusations of obfuscation stem from resistance to challenging orthodoxies. However, the hoaxes' success—despite fabricated data and absurd premises—suggests causal mechanisms of and ideological capture in , where jargon serves gatekeeping rather than elucidation, eroding public trust in affected disciplines. In contrast to technical jargon in sciences, which typically maps to verifiable phenomena, academic-ideological variants often resist empirical testing, prioritizing interpretive .

Empirical Evidence

Studies on Comprehension Impacts

Empirical studies consistently demonstrate that jargon impairs comprehension among non-experts, often by disrupting processing fluency and increasing , though effects can vary by context and familiarity. For instance, in administrative texts, replacing jargon with plain terms improved comprehension accuracy from 55.8% to 64.2%, with difficult terms extending reading times by 178 milliseconds on average, indicating slower processing without overall time savings. In medical communication, experiments using videos of providers explaining diagnoses (e.g., orthopedics, , cancer) to 32 college students found that higher jargon complexity significantly reduced perceived clarity (p < 0.001, η² = 0.331) and self-reported understanding (p < 0.001, η² = 0.342), with orthopedic topics rated hardest (mean 3.05/5). knowledge did not mitigate these effects (p = 0.497), underscoring jargon's barrier independent of baseline . Analyses of summaries in health research reveal persistent issues, with 1,241 summaries averaging a Flesch Reading Ease score of 39.0 (indicating college-level difficulty) and jargon scores of 91.7, where only 2.8% met thresholds (≥60). Jargon and showed a moderate positive (r = 0.249, P < 0.001), implying higher jargon density exacerbates inaccessibility for lay readers, none of whom could easily comprehend the average summary matching reading norms. Longitudinal trends in further highlight comprehension challenges, as of 709,577 abstracts from 1881 to 2015 declined sharply (Flesch Reading Ease r = -0.93, P < 10⁻¹⁵), driven by rising general scientific jargon usage (r = 0.96, P < 10⁻¹⁵), a pattern uniform across disciplines. This suggests jargon proliferation hinders broader understanding, prioritizing specialist efficiency over accessibility.

Quantification and Prevalence Metrics

One quantitative metric for assessing jargon in text is "jargonness," defined as log⁡(fsfg)\log\left(\frac{f_s}{f_g}\right) where fsf_s is the word's in a scientific corpus and fgf_g in a general corpus, or 3 if fg=0f_g = 0. This measure captures a word's relative specificity to expert domains, with higher values indicating greater jargon. An open-source R script enables calculation of average jargonness per word in English texts. In scientific abstracts, jargon prevalence varies by source; (NSF) abstracts exhibit significantly higher jargonness than general texts, peer-reviewed articles, or news reports. For instance, analysis of abstracts shows elevated use of domain-specific terms, reducing accessibility for non-experts. Proportion of jargon words in titles and abstracts correlates inversely with citation counts, suggesting overuse may limit broader impact. Medical quantify jargon through direct observation; in 70 inpatient family-centered rounds, 443 jargon terms or phrases were used, with 70% unexplained to patients or families. In summaries of clinical trials, average jargon scores reached 91.7 on a De-Jargonizer scale (range 76.4–99.3), with only 21.7% scoring low enough for general audiences. These metrics highlight persistent high prevalence in specialized settings despite efforts toward simplification.

Criticisms and Controversies

Barriers to Accessibility and Exclusion Effects

Jargon impedes by demanding prior familiarity with specialized , thereby restricting comprehension and for those outside the relevant community. demonstrates that jargon disrupts cognitive processing, as evidenced by a 2019 study where participants exposed to jargon-laden scientific explanations exhibited poorer metacognitive accuracy in assessing their own understanding and heightened resistance to the presented information compared to those receiving plain-language equivalents. This effect persists across contexts, with a 2020 quantifying jargon prevalence in scientific texts and linking its reduction to improved processing fluency and among lay audiences. In healthcare, professional jargon exacerbates exclusion by hindering patient-provider communication, often resulting in misunderstandings that compromise treatment adherence and outcomes. A 2022 cross-sectional survey of 463 adults at the found that participants correctly understood only about 50% of common medical phrases on average, with particular confusion around terms like "acute" (interpreted by 26% as chronic or long-term) and "your is benign" (misunderstood by 60% as potentially harmful). Similarly, a 2011 qualitative study of interprofessional healthcare teams identified jargon as exclusionary, fostering cultural that limit and alienate junior staff or patients from decision-making processes. These barriers disproportionately affect non-native speakers or lower-education groups, amplifying health disparities through reduced access to clear information. Legal and bureaucratic jargon similarly erects exclusionary walls, rendering documents and proceedings opaque to laypersons and perpetuating power asymmetries. For example, complex legalese in contracts or court filings has been shown to reduce comprehension rates below 50% among general populations in assessments, leading to higher error rates in compliance and increased reliance on intermediaries. In academia, jargon reinforces gatekeeping, as a 2018 linguistic analysis of medical school admissions revealed how specialized language in interviews signaled , favoring candidates from privileged backgrounds familiar with such discourse and disadvantaging others regardless of merit. Overall, these effects cultivate insider-outsider dynamics, where jargon not only obscures meaning but also entrenches professional hierarchies by signaling expertise while marginalizing external scrutiny or participation.

Allegations of Obfuscation and Power Dynamics

Critics have alleged that jargon serves as a deliberate mechanism for , allowing users to conceal straightforward realities behind layers of specialized terminology, thereby evading direct or scrutiny. This practice, often termed "," incorporates jargon alongside euphemisms and vagueness to mask uncomfortable truths, particularly in political and bureaucratic contexts, as exemplified by phrases like "servicing the target" for military bombing or "downsizing" for mass layoffs. Such is said to preserve an appearance of competence and control amid failure or , deflecting criticism by rendering communications incomprehensible to outsiders. In bureaucratic environments, allegations center on "gobbledygook" or "bureaucratese"—verbose, euphemism-laden language designed to obscure actions and inflate trivialities, as coined by U.S. Congressman Maury Maverick in 1944 to decry federal . A 1977 New York Times analysis highlighted how U.S. government jargon repeats, exaggerates, and covers up realities through and bombast, complicating public oversight of administrative processes. Similarly, in corporate settings, excessive jargon is accused of transforming simple mismanagement into arcane expertise, enhancing managerial power by alienating subordinates and stakeholders who cannot parse the terms. Regarding power dynamics, detractors argue that jargon erects hierarchical barriers by signaling insider status and excluding non-initiates, thereby perpetuating elite control over and . In academia, for instance, dense jargon is criticized for limiting access to ideas, reinforcing prestige among peers while alienating broader audiences and entrenching institutional hierarchies. Sociolinguistic analyses posit , including jargon, as a tool for constructing and exercising power, where mastery of obscure terms grants and marginalizes dissenters lacking equivalent "linguistic capital." These dynamics allegedly enable dominant groups to maintain social structures, as jargon proficiency becomes a gatekeeping mechanism that prioritizes over clarity.

Ideological Debates and Political Weaponization

Jargon in ideological debates often serves as a tool for framing narratives and marginalizing opposing views, transforming technical or specialized terms into mechanisms of exclusion and persuasion. , in his 1946 "Politics and the English Language," critiqued the use of vague phrases and ready-made in political writing, arguing that it enables the defense of indefensible positions by obscuring precise meaning and evading concrete facts. This dynamic extends to ideological jargon, where terms drawn from academic or activist spheres—such as "" or "hegemonic structures"—signal allegiance to specific worldviews while complicating empirical analysis, as critics contend these constructs prioritize theoretical abstraction over verifiable causation. In environments like academia, where left-leaning ideological dominance is empirically documented through surveys showing over 80% of faculty identifying as liberal or progressive as of 2020, such jargon can enforce by pathologizing as ignorance or moral failing, rather than engaging data-driven counterarguments. Politically, jargon is weaponized to redefine realities and delegitimize adversaries without substantive debate, a tactic evident in partisan where terms evolve to obscure uncomfortable truths. For instance, and activist euphemisms like "enhanced interrogation" for , coined in the early 2000s, exemplify how specialized phrasing sanitizes actions that would otherwise provoke ethical scrutiny, allowing policymakers to maintain . In ideological clashes, conservatives have accused progressive jargon—such as labeling biological skepticism as "phobia"—of functioning as a rhetorical bludgeon to suppress first-principles reasoning about differences, backed by twin studies showing rates for traits like aggression exceeding 50% in meta-analyses from 2015 onward. Conversely, right-leaning terms like "" are critiqued for similarly abstracting complex bureaucracies into conspiratorial shorthand, though empirical evidence of institutional bias, such as the FBI's documented handling of 2016 election-related investigations, lends partial credence to such framings over pure obfuscation. These usages highlight a causal : jargon proliferates in power-holding institutions to consolidate narratives, as seen in curricula where excessive ideological terminology distorts historical data by embedding untestable assumptions, per analyses from 2020. Debates over jargon’s role intensify around its potential to erode public discourse, with evidence suggesting it alienates broader audiences and entrenches polarization. Studies on language drift indicate that diverging semantic interpretations—e.g., "equity" shifting from to engineered outcomes—foster parallel political lexicons, reducing cross-ideological comprehension by up to 20% in experimental settings as of 2017. Critics from varied perspectives, including left-leaning outlets, argue that activist and academic jargon obscures actionable insights, as in fields where multisyllabic constructs mask simplistic moral claims, hindering causal analysis of issues like inequality, which correlates more strongly with family structure (r=0.7 in U.S. from 1960-2020) than with nebulous "structures." This weaponization, while bidirectional, disproportionately affects truth-seeking in biased institutional contexts, where mainstream sources often amplify one-sided jargon without noting its empirical weaknesses, as Orwell warned would corrupt thought itself.

Mitigation and Alternatives

Plain Language Initiatives

Plain language initiatives encompass organized efforts by governments, agencies, and international bodies to simplify official communications, replacing specialized jargon with clear, accessible wording to enhance public understanding and usability. These initiatives emerged prominently in the through federal encouragements for regulatory writers to use , evolving into formal mandates. By the late 1990s, President Bill Clinton's June 1, 1998, memorandum directed all federal agencies to employ in communications with the public. In the United States, the Plain Writing Act of 2010, enacted as 111-274, mandates that federal agencies produce clear, concise, well-organized documents intended for the public, following best practices appropriate to the subject or field. The Act defines plain writing as grammatically correct language with complete sentence structure and accurate word usage, aiming to improve government accountability and citizen access to information and services. Compliance requires agencies to designate plain writing coordinators, train staff, and report annually on implementation, with examples including revised regulations from the . At the state level, Maryland's 2023 executive order under Governor requires state agencies to use to eliminate communication barriers. Internationally, the International Plain Language Federation, formed to advance practices globally, promotes public benefits through professional standards and training resources, including efforts toward an ISO standard for plain-language documents. The Plain Language Association International (PLAIN) defines as communication where wording, structure, and design enable audiences to easily find, understand, and use information, supporting initiatives in policy and legal drafting. Clarity, an association focused on plain legal language, operates with members across dozens of countries to simplify contracts and statutes, tracing roots to movements in the 1970s. These efforts collectively prioritize empirical testing of , such as through randomized studies demonstrating improved layperson comprehension of simplified summaries over jargon-heavy originals.

Glossaries, Translation Efforts, and Best Practices

Glossaries serve as essential tools for demystifying jargon by compiling definitions of specialized terms alongside plain-language equivalents, thereby facilitating comprehension across audiences. In educational contexts, resources such as the Family Dictionary of Educational Terms provide explanations for acronyms and phrases commonly used in schooling, aiming to bridge gaps for parents and non-experts. Similarly, state-level initiatives like Ohio's Glossary of Terms for define potentially confusing to support educators and students. These compilations ensure consistency in usage and reduce misinterpretation, particularly in fields where jargon density can exceed 20-30% of text in academic outputs. Translation efforts translate technical jargon into accessible prose, often through systematic rewriting or reformulation. The U.S. Plain Writing Act of 2010 mandates federal agencies to employ clear language in public communications, resulting in revised documents that prioritize active voice and short sentences over legalese or bureaucratic terms. The Plain Language Action and Information Network (PLAIN), a federal community, disseminates guidelines derived from this act, including the Federal Plain Language Guidelines, which emphasize reader-focused structure to eliminate ambiguity. In academia, projects like machine-assisted translation of into multiple languages address barriers for non-native speakers, with studies showing improved accessibility when jargon is substituted with synonyms or contextual explanations. Legal translation efforts further exemplify this by replacing archaic phrases with equivalents, as seen in guidelines promoting plain language in multilingual documents to enhance equity. Best practices for jargon recommend initial identification of audience-specific unfamiliar terms, followed by deliberate substitution or . Writers should define key jargon upon first use and opt for everyday synonyms where precision allows, such as replacing "ameliorate" with "improve" in non-technical contexts. Additional strategies include employing , limiting sentences to 20-25 words, and structuring content hierarchically to avoid overload, which empirical tests confirm boosts by up to 50% in scientific summaries. In professional settings, iterative testing with lay readers—via tools like readability scores—ensures revisions eliminate without sacrificing accuracy, as advocated in style guides for . When jargon retention is unavoidable for exactitude, pairing it with visual aids or appendices maintains inclusivity.

References

  1. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5504873/
  2. https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/general_writing/academic_writing/using_appropriate_language/group_jargon.html
  3. https://www.etymonline.com/word/jargon
  4. https://www.americanexpress.com/en-us/business/trends-and-insights/articles/the-history-of-jargon/
  5. https://www.thoughtco.com/what-is-jargon-1691202
  6. https://courses.lumenlearning.com/suny-esc-communicationforprofessionals/chapter/word-choice/
  7. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/281493093_Language_Usage_of_Jargon_and_Slang_in_Strategic_Studies
  8. https://magazine.columbia.edu/article/excessive-jargon-sign-insecurity-and-other-research-findings
  9. https://comm.osu.edu/sites/comm.osu.edu/files/PUS%25202019-%2520Bullock%2520et%2520al..pdf
  10. https://www.socialsciencespace.com/2020/02/jargon-may-be-even-worse-for-communicating-complexity-than-you-thought/
  11. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7540871/
  12. https://bluemarkpublishers.com/index.php/JLLS/article/download/91/58/245
  13. https://www.npr.org/sections/13.7/2017/06/12/532554252/the-dangers-of-hidden-jargon-in-communicating-science
  14. https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2021/06/18/jargon/
  15. https://www.thoughtco.com/slang-jargon-idiom-and-proverb-1211734
  16. https://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/learningenglish/radio/specials/1535_questionanswer/page19.shtml
  17. https://blog.authenticjourneys.info/2015/10/difference-between-slang-buzzwords-and-jargon.html
  18. https://www.maine.edu/content-management/writing-style-guide/shorthand/
  19. https://www.copypress.com/kb/copy/the-pros-and-cons-of-using-jargon/
  20. https://www.strategy-business.com/article/li00065
  21. https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/113689/difference-between-jargon-and-technical-terms
  22. https://www.nngroup.com/articles/technical-jargon/
  23. http://www2.ensc.sfu.ca/~whitmore/courses/style/templates/jargon.html
  24. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/jargon
  25. https://www.oed.com/dictionary/jargon_v
  26. https://wordfoolery.wordpress.com/2022/09/12/the-history-of-jargon/
  27. https://uselessetymology.com/2018/05/23/the-etymologies-of-jargon-jabber-and-gibberish/
  28. https://openmd.com/guide/history-of-medical-terminology
  29. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC1079361/
  30. https://www.truelanguage.com/the-evolution-of-scientific-language-tracing-translations-through-time/
  31. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/decoding-origins-business-jargon-linguistic-evolution-6gc1e
  32. https://textio.com/blog/corporate-jargon-a-brief-history-and-the-best-solution
  33. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0749597820303666
  34. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3048148/
  35. https://www.atlassian.com/blog/teamwork/when-to-use-corporate-jargon
  36. https://olodocoder.hashnode.dev/comprehensive-guide-to-using-jargon-in-technical-writing
  37. https://ecorrector.com/how-to-translate-scientific-jargon-for-a-lay-audience-effective-science-communication/
  38. https://www.quora.com/Why-is-scientific-terminology-important
  39. https://india.mongabay.com/2023/06/explainer-why-do-we-use-jargon-when-talking-about-science/
  40. https://www.iec.ch/standards-development/role-terminology
  41. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17483107.2022.2112985
  42. https://zienjournals.com/index.php/jpip/article/download/810/662/842
  43. https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rspb.2020.2581
  44. https://russelhirst.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/scientific-jargon1.pdf
  45. https://www.nibib.nih.gov/science-education/glossary
  46. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8059506/
  47. https://www.nigms.nih.gov/education/glossary
  48. https://www.rivier.edu/academics/blog-posts/circling-back-on-corporate-speak-the-history-and-impact-of-business-jargon/
  49. https://www.betterup.com/blog/corporate-jargon
  50. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/234147765_Texts_and_Bureaucracy
  51. https://wos.academiascience.org/index.php/wos/article/download/1284/1200/2466
  52. https://business.columbia.edu/insights/business-society/hidden-impact-professional-jargon-how-language-reveals-status-and
  53. https://www.emerald.com/jfra/article/doi/10.1108/JFRA-05-2025-0420/1276106/To-communicate-or-obfuscate-Public-support-and-the
  54. https://www.eclectic.ca/resources/blog/reduce-jargon-effective-communication
  55. https://libguides.usc.edu/writingguide/academicwriting
  56. https://www.gleech.org/pomo
  57. https://www.simplypsychology.org/postmodernism.html
  58. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/diogenes/article/hard-and-soft-obscurantism-in-the-humanities-and-social-sciences/177852A062B7A23DE9BDFE8F1EE28969
  59. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/241646578_Hard_and_Soft_Obscurantism_in_the_Humanities_and_Social_Sciences
  60. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0162243920923087
  61. https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/10/new-sokal-hoax/572212/
  62. https://www.vox.com/2018/10/15/17951492/grievance-studies-sokal-squared-hoax
  63. https://www.newstatesman.com/ideas/agora/2022/08/whats-behind-successful-academic-hoax
  64. http://www.critical-theory.com/defense-obscurantism/
  65. https://elifesciences.org/articles/27725
  66. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ijal.12650
  67. https://digitalcommons.gaacademy.org/gjs/vol83/iss1/83/
  68. https://www.jmir.org/2025/1/e50862
  69. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0963662520937436
  70. https://scholarworks.montana.edu/bitstreams/a74fb159-8c8f-4bb6-a870-61fec1e38a7e/download
  71. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/342722456_Quantifying_scientific_jargon
  72. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33707184/
  73. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39805102/
  74. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11773280/
  75. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/334738666_Jargon_as_a_barrier_to_effective_science_communication_Evidence_from_metacognition
  76. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9713608/
  77. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/51626256_Interprofessional_jargon_How_is_it_exclusionary_Cultural_determinants_of_language_use_in_health_care_practice
  78. https://bmchealthservres.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12913-021-06750-4
  79. https://www.torhoermanlaw.com/importance-of-accessible-language/
  80. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10459-018-9809-2
  81. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21899399/
  82. https://fourweekmba.com/doublespeak/
  83. https://www.cilexlawschool.ac.uk/fulldisplay/r1ZM0z/4S9078/ExamplesOfDoublespeakInPolitics.pdf
  84. https://politicaldictionary.com/words/gobbledygook/
  85. https://www.nytimes.com/1977/05/10/archives/federal-jargon-obfuscates-repeats-exaggerates-and-covers-up.html
  86. https://www.thoughtco.com/what-is-bureaucratese-1689186
  87. https://thefamiliarstrange.com/2017/03/23/7-jargon-exclusion-and-the-public-sphere/
  88. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/387456943_The_Power_Dynamics_in_Language_and_Culture
  89. https://ryteup.com/blog/language-and-power-examining-societal-hierarchies/
  90. https://www.orwellfoundation.com/the-orwell-foundation/orwell/essays-and-other-works/politics-and-the-english-language/
  91. https://www.currentaffairs.org/news/2017/07/academic-language-and-the-problem-of-meaninglessness
  92. https://www.qfac.ca/blog/government-euphemisms-obscuring-the-truth-in-official-language
  93. https://www.milwaukeeindependent.com/syndicated/avoiding-politi-speak-activist-jargon-obscures-clarifies/
  94. https://www.the-independent.com/voices/comment/weasel-words-that-politicians-use-to-obscure-terrible-truths-8210302.html
  95. https://calmatters.org/education/2020/12/4-forms-of-bias-to-avoid-in-designing-ethnic-studies-for-high-schools/
  96. https://www.psu.edu/news/research/story/sad-drifting-word-meanings-may-be-creating-two-different-political-languages
  97. http://tsl.news/opinion-unnecessary-complexity-in-academic-writing/
  98. https://quillette.com/2022/12/28/politics-and-the-english-language-2023/
  99. https://digital.gov/resources/plain-language-history-and-timeline
  100. https://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/open/plain-writing/fed-mandates
  101. https://www.govinfo.gov/link/plaw/111/public/274
  102. https://digital.gov/resources/plain-writing-act
  103. https://digitalgovernmenthub.org/examples/maryland-plain-language-initiative-executive-order/
  104. https://www.iplfederation.org/
  105. https://plainlanguagenetwork.org/plain-language/what-is-plain-language/
  106. https://www.clarity-international.org/
  107. https://econtent.hogrefe.com/doi/10.1027/2151-2604/a000570
  108. https://education.ohio.gov/Topics/Learning-in-Ohio/English-Language-Art/Resources-for-English-Language-Arts/Glossary-of-Terms-for-English-Language-Arts
  109. https://5minuteenglish.com/translating-complex-academic-terminology-into-everyday-english/
  110. https://www.dol.gov/general/plainwriting
  111. https://wid.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/FederalPLGuidelines.pdf
  112. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9525128/
  113. https://www.ata-divisions.org/LawD/plain-language-for-clear-and-accessible-legal-translations/
  114. https://www.ruruconsulting.com/blog/reduce-jargon-and-complex-language/
  115. https://asm.org/articles/policy/2021/october-21/how-to-eliminate-jargon-from-science-communication
  116. https://www.cwauthors.com/article/How-to-write-about-complex-scientific-concepts-in-simple-accessible-language
  117. https://digital.gov/guides/plain-language
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.