When Plain English doesn't work

Greg Pendlebury is a craftsman copywriter and a resident of Sydney. Over the years Greg has enriched my understanding and appreciation of the finer points of written English through his excellent email communications. His articles have comprehensively identified some of the shortfalls in my own writing style and ability, for which I am eternally grateful.

Greg recently distributed an insightful article on using plain English. He has kindly consented to me publishing it on this blog. Take heed all those who believe that effective communication is achieved by abandoning complex sentence structures and the writing of verbose language with flamboyant descriptions. It is not as simple as you think.

When Plain English doesn’t work
Look through almost any book about Plain English and you will likely see somewhere a list of simple words that can be used to replace more complex words or expressions: 'use' instead of 'utilise'; 'before' instead of 'prior to', and so on. Using the simplest word possible to convey meaning is important, but it is not enough.

You'll also find guidelines about sentence length and sentence structure: 'prefer active voice over passive voice'; 'one thought one sentence'; etc.

All this is very good advice, but it will not guarantee a document is written plainly. It will not guarantee that readers will be engaged and understand what you are saying. If that's all you do when attempting to write in plain English it won't work. These mechanical aspects are necessary but not sufficient.

The starting point for clear writing is clear thinking. If your thoughts are not clear (and worthwhile) no amount of simple language will make them any better.

The point was well made by Tadgell J in a judgment given more than 10 years ago (about legislation). He said:

"Official publicity has recently been demanded for the notion that law-makers and practising lawyers should now strive to speak in so-called 'plain English'. The ideal of unmistakably clear verbal expression is admirable but surely not new. To vaunt it as though previous generations had overlooked and neglected it is to risk the mistake of substituting conceit for zeal. It is another mistake to suppose that clarity of expression can be an end in itself. Plain English alone achieves nothing. To be useful it must run in tandem with clear thought. After all, English speech - in the law at least - is a vehicle for the conveyance of ideas. A feeble or wandering idea will not become strong and precise merely because it is dressed in plain, homely language: it will remain simply a poor idea, and perhaps more obviously and emphatically so because it is plainly expressed. A bright idea, on the other hand, is likely to find its own expression and thereby to make itself understood. Statutes, if I may say so, do not commonly contain many naturally bright ideas that speak for themselves, especially those parts of them that seek to create indictable offences. They need to work hard in order to make themselves clearly understood, if only because there are persons whose interests are served by trying to misunderstand them."

The message is simple and plain - to communicate well (in legislation and other documents) get your thinking straight.

The process of writing is a powerful way to get your thinking straight.
Think-write.

Quotations taken from a speech given by the Hon. Justice K.M. Hayne when opening the Centre for Commercial Law, Australian National University, 12 May 1999.

Check out Greg’s ‘Getting the words right’ link below – valuable advice on saying things simply and more effectively.
http://www.thinkwrite.com.au/Getting%20the%20words%20right.htm

Each month (usually) Communication Matters discusses matters that impact the effectiveness of communication. It’s written by Greg Pendlebury of Think-write Pty Ltd. Previous issues are available at http://www.thinkwrite.com.au/newsletter.html

Share on Facebook