By Steve
Willey
Let’s see if you can understand this sentence without having to give it any real thought:
All transactions effected pursuant to this instrument shall be effected for the account and risk and in the name of the undersigned; and the undersigned hereby agrees to indemnify and hold you harmless from, and to pay you promptly on demand, any and all losses arising there from or any debit balance due thereon.
Still scratching your head? How about this, then:
You'll be responsible for anything you owe on your account.
When writers come across source material, they often run into gobbledygook like the above example of jargon, which is sometimes a condensed, efficient means of communication between individuals working in the same field. Doctors will know right off that ESRD is short for End Stage Renal Disease. BizActions writers will say Timely Op to mean Timely Opportunity. Wall Street Journal writers will know that the Ten Point refers to the What’s News column on page one that is printed in a ten point font.
Everyone in those situations understands everyone else. No harm, no foul. (Oops, I slipped into jargon there.)
When we write for our sponsors, however, the situation turns more complicated. We need to avoid gobbledygook and jargon, a word that derives from a 14th Century word meaning the “twittering or warbling of birds.” As writers, it’s our job to translate the twittering into plain English that can be readily understood by readers from divergent backgrounds. We want to be certain they have no doubt about what we are writing and what it means.
An example of how avoiding jargon and gobbledygook is helpful: A local office of the Veterans Affairs Department rewrote a standard form to make it more clear and found that the number of telephone calls about the form dropped to 200 a year from 1,200.
So, if we are writing an article on getting a mortgage, there is no point in using the term conveyance fee. Few will know what we mean. Much simpler to simply say a person could be charged money to cover the costs of handling the paperwork involved in transferring ownership.
In an investment article, we would avoid saying a company is full franked. We’d say simply that it has paid full corporate tax on its dividends.
That’s not to say we don’t use any jargon. Some is necessary. An accounting article may require the use of, say, the term zero-based budget. Fine, but be sure you immediately define it. Of course there, too, you can run into a problem. Which of these two definitions do you think works best?
1. A method of budgeting in which all expenditures must be justified each new period, as opposed to only explaining the amounts requested in excess of the previous period's funding, or
2. A budget where total income minus total expenses equals zero dollars. In other words, you assign every dollar or of income to an expense or savings category. This method forces you to spend your monthly income on paper before you spend it in real life.
Use plain English in your writing and your speech and you can avoid a situation similar to the one in 1985 when former President Ronald Reagan, describing some tax law revisions, said they didn’t improve the system and instead made it more like “Washington itself: complicated, unfair, cluttered with gobbledygook and loopholes designed for those with the power and influence to hire high-priced legal and tax advisers."
Here are four examples of my least favorite jargons often found in daily conversations:
Dynamic solutions
Take ownership
Paradigm shift
Holistic approach
Send in your list of favorite and not so favorite pet-peeve bits of jargon and gobbledygook. Some families even have their own jargon. Share it with us so when we meet your relatives we’ll know what the heck they are talking about.