tag:theconversation.com,2011:/au/topics/jargon-14830/articlesJargon – The Conversation2024-01-02T21:03:29Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2137212024-01-02T21:03:29Z2024-01-02T21:03:29ZLanguage-related misunderstanding at work: What it is, why it occurs and what organizations can do about it<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/566699/original/file-20231219-21-d1nwu3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=49%2C368%2C5414%2C3268&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Language plays a central role in facilitating effective communication by allowing people to express their thoughts, share essential information and establish connections with one another.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">(Shutterstock)</span></span></figcaption></figure><iframe style="width: 100%; height: 100px; border: none; position: relative; z-index: 1;" allowtransparency="" allow="clipboard-read; clipboard-write" src="https://narrations.ad-auris.com/widget/the-conversation-canada/language-related-misunderstanding-at-work-what-it-is-why-it-occurs-and-what-organizations-can-do-about-it" width="100%" height="400"></iframe>
<p>Language is the <a href="https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003016366">foundation of human interaction</a>. It plays a central role in facilitating effective communication by allowing people to express their thoughts, share essential information and establish connections with one another. </p>
<p>In the workplace, linguistic diversity can be beneficial for organizations by <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.10.005">improving customer service</a> and increasing its geographical reach.</p>
<p>However, despite language’s ability to foster meaningful connections, it can also exacerbate divisions between people. When language falls short of its ability to facilitate communication, it can lead to misinterpretation and <a href="https://theconversation.com/language-has-become-a-tool-for-social-exclusion-112028">a sense of disconnection or exclusion</a>. </p>
<p>Various factors have given rise to an increasingly complex linguistic environment in Canadian workplaces, including <a href="https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-linguistic-diversity-on-the-rise-in-canada-census-data-show/">demographic shifts</a>, the proliferation of occupations requiring <a href="https://web-archive.oecd.org/2021-11-15/615940-Licence-to-capture-the-cost-consequences-to-consumers-of-occupational-regulation-in-Canada.pdf">licensing or certification</a> that come with their own forms of <a href="https://www.psychologytoday.com/ca/blog/rich-encounters/202308/we-use-specialized-language-too-much">specialized language</a>, and the <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2022/12/12/gen-z-work-emojis/">rapid emergence of Gen Z slang</a>, among others. </p>
<h2>Language in the workplace</h2>
<p>In the workplace, people communicate using both <a href="https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203348802">standard languages</a> (like English or French) and <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X20966714">hybrid languages</a> (such as jargon or slang). Both types of language can lead to misunderstanding.</p>
<p>While some people at work may intentionally use standard or hybrid language to hide information (e.g., lying) or exclude others (e.g., discrimination), our focus is on <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/01492063231181651">language-related misunderstanding</a>. This type of misunderstanding occurs when recipients unintentionally misinterpret a message due to the way it is verbally communicated.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Three young adults sitting in a row at a table working on laptops" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/566702/original/file-20231219-17-485vpb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/566702/original/file-20231219-17-485vpb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/566702/original/file-20231219-17-485vpb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/566702/original/file-20231219-17-485vpb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/566702/original/file-20231219-17-485vpb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/566702/original/file-20231219-17-485vpb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/566702/original/file-20231219-17-485vpb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Slang usage and demographic changes have given rise to an increasingly complex linguistic environment in Canadian workplaces.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">(Shutterstock)</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>A recent <a href="https://preply.com/en/blog/what-do-canadians-think-of-corporate-jargon/">survey of over a thousand Canadians</a> examined the prevalence of corporate jargon in organizations. The majority of survey participants (88 per cent) said they used corporate jargon in the workplace about six times per day on average. Thirty-five per cent of these respondents said workplace jargon made them feel confused, excluded or disengaged. </p>
<p>Similarly, <a href="https://drive.google.com/file/d/1vecS1AR-CI1wlRIVrQ4IKYMrQBRKAq90/view?ref=blog.duolingo.com">a Duolingo and LinkedIn survey</a> of employees in eight countries found that 40 per cent of respondents experienced language-related misunderstanding because of workplace jargon.</p>
<h2>Misunderstanding is widespread</h2>
<p>In light of these workplace trends, we conducted a <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206323118165">systematic review of 122 papers from various disciplines</a>, including management, psychology and communications, to examine the consequences of language-related misunderstanding in the workplace.</p>
<p>Our results found that language-related misunderstanding — from the use of both standard and hybrid languages — are common and can negatively affect employees’ <a href="https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2017.0236">job performance</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2699.10.1.56">reduce their commitment to work</a> and <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/1470595816684151">weaken trust between team members</a>.</p>
<p>We identified three distinct pathways through which language-related misunderstanding can influence employees’ work outcomes. These pathways can either operate independently or together.</p>
<p>The first is relational, highlighting interpersonal conflicts and tensions that are associated with language-related misunderstanding. The second is affective, emphasizing the intense negative emotions associated with misunderstanding. The final is informational, highlighting the loss of information that can result from language-related misunderstanding.</p>
<h2>Managing language dynamics at work</h2>
<p>There are several ways of preventing language-related misunderstanding in the workplace.</p>
<p><strong>1. Develop a language management strategy:</strong> <a href="https://hbr.org/2014/09/whats-your-language-strategy">Organizations should create a strategy</a> that recognizes the importance of both standard and hybrid language skills for organizational performance. </p>
<p>After identifying relevant competencies, resources can be allocated to address any gaps. This could involve <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwb.2010.07.005">providing translation resources</a>, such as translation software, to enhance effective communication and minimize misunderstanding. </p>
<p>In situations where corporate jargon, acronyms and specialized terms are necessary, organizations can provide explicit definitions and easy access to all members through a centralized location, like a corporate intranet.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Two men in business attire have a conversation while seated at a table. One is holding a tablet." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/566700/original/file-20231219-29-fi64tu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/566700/original/file-20231219-29-fi64tu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/566700/original/file-20231219-29-fi64tu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/566700/original/file-20231219-29-fi64tu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/566700/original/file-20231219-29-fi64tu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/566700/original/file-20231219-29-fi64tu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/566700/original/file-20231219-29-fi64tu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Using multiple communication channels when conveying important information in case one channel proves ineffective can reduce the chances of misunderstanding.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">(Shutterstock)</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p><strong>2. Lead efforts to bridge language gaps:</strong> <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2015.05.006">Leaders play a crucial role in improving communication</a> within their teams. They can promote situational awareness by encouraging employees to consider the language capabilities of their colleagues and ensuring team members use language that everyone understands. </p>
<p>Leaders can enhance comprehension by developing processes that promote <a href="https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1110.0638">communication redundancy</a>. For instance, leaders could ask employees to use multiple communication channels (e.g., email and in-person meetings) when conveying important information in case one channel proves ineffective. </p>
<p>Fostering a culture where team members feel comfortable asking questions and seeking clarifications without fear of reprisal is also essential.</p>
<p><strong>3. Be proactive in ensuring mutual understanding:</strong> Employees can help reduce the possibility of language-related misunderstanding by <a href="https://www.ohscanada.com/features/spell-it-out-using-plain-language-to-create-inclusive-workplaces/">expressing their ideas in plain language</a>, avoiding jargon and opting for short, familiar words. </p>
<p>Organizations can support these behaviours by offering training programs geared towards <a href="https://hbr.org/2014/09/whats-your-language-strategy">developing employees’ interpersonal and language competencies</a>. For instance, these training programs could focus on boosting employees’ empathy, perspective-taking skills and language processing fluency.</p>
<p>Managing language dynamics in the workplace requires a careful, thoughtful approach. While linguistic diversity can be beneficial, organizations must recognize the potential for misunderstanding due to language differences. </p>
<p>Creating a workplace culture that prioritizes transparent and inclusive communication practices is crucial for fully harnessing the benefits of linguistic diversity.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/213721/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>John Fiset receives funding from Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Devasheesh Bhave receives funding from the Singapore Ministry of Education (MOE) Academic Research Fund (AcRF).</span></em></p>When language falls short of its ability to facilitate communication in the workplace, it can lead to misinterpretation and a sense of disconnection or exclusion.John Fiset, Associate Professor, Management, Saint Mary’s UniversityDevasheesh Bhave, Associate Professor of Organisational Behaviour and Human Resources, Singapore Management UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1898702022-09-07T20:07:17Z2022-09-07T20:07:17ZThe end of jargon: will New Zealand’s plain language law finally make bureaucrats talk like normal people?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/483140/original/file-20220907-13-mlo6ss.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">GettyImages</span> </figcaption></figure><p>Which sentence is easier to understand? “He was conveyed to his place of residence in an intoxicated condition.” Or, “He was carried home drunk.” Most people choose the latter, for obvious reasons. </p>
<p>This <a href="https://global.oup.com/academic/product/oxford-guide-to-plain-english-9780198844617?cc=at&lang=en&#">century-old example</a> is a useful illustration of how “plain language” can be used to communicate more clearly, from everyday interactions right through to government documents.</p>
<p>The new <a href="https://www.legislation.govt.nz/bill/member/2021/0070/latest/d362751e2.html?search=qs_act%40bill%40regulation%40deemedreg_plain+language_resel_25_h&p=1&sr=1">Plain Language Bill</a> now before parliament aims to make this more than just an ideal. Comprehensible information from government organisations, it argues, is a basic democratic right.</p>
<h2>The push for simplicity</h2>
<p>Plain language movements originated in the 1970s in several countries, including the UK, US and Canada. And there’s some indication the very first mention of plain language dates back as far as the writings of Geoffrey Chaucer in the 1300s. </p>
<p>However old, these movements strove for clear, straightforward and accessible language in official documents. This is not merely a “nice-to-have”. In some cases it can save your life – pandemic instructions from the Ministry of Health, for example. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/language-puts-ordinary-people-at-a-disadvantage-in-the-criminal-justice-system-79934">Language puts ordinary people at a disadvantage in the criminal justice system</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>And there is also an element of linguistic equality to it: minority, migrant and marginalised communities have more difficulty understanding complex and jargon-laden documents, which tip the scales even further against them.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Older woman reading documents at home" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/483122/original/file-20220907-22-1s7x6n.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/483122/original/file-20220907-22-1s7x6n.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/483122/original/file-20220907-22-1s7x6n.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/483122/original/file-20220907-22-1s7x6n.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/483122/original/file-20220907-22-1s7x6n.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/483122/original/file-20220907-22-1s7x6n.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/483122/original/file-20220907-22-1s7x6n.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Plain language is a justice issue, allowing non-native English speakers to better understand official documents.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com.au/detail/photo/senior-lady-at-home-working-with-documents-royalty-free-image/1054911598?adppopup=true">Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>What is plain language?</h2>
<p>There is no single definition of plain language, but both the UK and US commonly use the one proposed by the <a href="https://plainlanguagenetwork.org">International Plain Language Working Group</a>: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>A communication is in plain language if its wording, structure, and design are so clear that the intended audience can easily find what they need, understand what they find, and use that information.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>In practice, it is easier to recognise a text written in plain language than one that is not. But it also depends on who is reading it. What may be plain language for some, will not be for others. </p>
<p>That said, basic tenets of plain language texts in English include:</p>
<ul>
<li><p>using concise sentences (15-20 words max)</p></li>
<li><p>positive (not negative) clauses </p></li>
<li><p>active, not passive voice (“if you break the law” not “if the law is broken”) </p></li>
<li><p>verbs rather than complex nouns (“identify” not “identification”) </p></li>
<li><p>common words <a href="https://www.msd.govt.nz/about-msd-and-our-work/work-programmes/accessibility/quick-reference-guides/checklist-for-plain-language.html">rather than jargon</a>. </p></li>
</ul>
<p>Although the principles of plain language are not new, mandating them through New Zealand legislation is. </p>
<h2>The Plain Language Bill</h2>
<p>Aotearoa New Zealand’s Plain Language Bill aims to: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>improve the effectiveness and accountability of public service agencies and Crown agents, and to improve the accessibility of certain documents that they make available to the public, by providing for those documents to use language that is (a) appropriate to the intended audience; and (b) clear, concise, and well organised. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>The bill before parliament does not explicitly define plain language beyond this description. We’ll have to wait for the details. </p>
<p>If the bill is passed into law, the Public Service Commissioner will have to produce material to help agencies comply with plain language requirements. </p>
<p>Only after seeing this guidance material will we know what effect reforms might have on government documents. So, MPs will essentially be voting without knowing what the bill will actually require agencies to do in practice. </p>
<h2>The devil in the details</h2>
<p>There are some other important things to note about what the bill does and doesn’t do. </p>
<p>It aims to improve accessibility of documents for people with disabilities. It does not affect the use of te reo Māori in government agency documents, nor does it propose to compel agencies to translate documents into languages other than English. </p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1565494715616841734"}"></div></p>
<p>Perhaps most importantly, the bill does not include any enforcement mechanisms, although agencies and agents will be required to report their progress. </p>
<p>The bill is procedural in nature: it creates no enforceable rights or obligations. Members of the public will not be able to seek any form of remedy if they continue to find documents difficult to understand. </p>
<h2>International experience</h2>
<p>Given that New Zealand’s bill is closely modelled on the <a href="https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/PLAW-111publ274">Plain Writing Act 2010</a> in the US, it is useful to consider the law’s impact there. </p>
<p>After it was passed, plain language advocates in the US were <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/federal-eye/wp/2013/11/19/plain-writing-in-government-agencies-plainly-speaking-arent-there-yet/">initially unimpressed</a> by <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/advocates-of-the-plain-writing-act-prod-federal-agencies-to-keep-it-simple/2012/04/08/gIQAlTCe4S_story.html">its impact</a>. But the <a href="https://centerforplainlanguage.org/about/history/">Center for Plain Language</a>, a non-governmental organisation that publishes report cards on writing quality in government agency documents, noted significant improvements between 2013 and 2021. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/research-shows-most-online-consumer-contracts-are-incomprehensible-but-still-legally-binding-110793">Research shows most online consumer contracts are incomprehensible, but still legally binding</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p><a href="https://centerforplainlanguage.org/reports/federal-report-card/2013-report-card/">In 2013</a>, half of the 20 agencies reviewed either failed or required improvement to meet plain writing requirements, while in 2021 <a href="https://centerforplainlanguage.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/2021-FRC-one-pager.signed.jpg">every agency passed</a>. </p>
<h2>Will it work?</h2>
<p>Will this bill work to make government documents more accessible for New Zealanders? The short answer is, we don’t know yet. But the US experience suggests some progress is likely. </p>
<p>One thing the New Zealand bill is already doing, however, is increasing awareness of the need for clear communication. Some MPs have <a href="https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/129751653/labours-plain-language-bill-passes-second-reading">voiced concern</a> about the cost of the reforms, the lack of enforceability, and even that the new law will increase bureaucracy. </p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1565114897721344000"}"></div></p>
<p>However, important insights can be gained from regular reporting. There are also potential financial benefits from reducing the volume of followup communication with government agencies. </p>
<p>Overall, there is a clear social benefit in improving official communication. And instead of being conveyed to their place of residence in a state of intoxication, perhaps drunks will just be carried home.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/189870/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Andreea S. Calude received funding from The Royal Society Marsden Grant (2018-2020). </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Sam Campbell does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Despite a lack of enforceable remedies, international experience suggests the proposed new ‘plain language’ law should improve official communications.Andreea S. Calude, Senior Lecturer in Linguistics, University of WaikatoSam Campbell, Law Lecturer, University of WaikatoLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1790022022-03-21T12:13:32Z2022-03-21T12:13:32Z6 wildfire terms to understand, from red flag warning to 100% containment<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/451454/original/file-20220310-13-f017p7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C70%2C4267%2C2938&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Forest floors are often laden with fuel for fires.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/photo/burnout-at-b-b-complex-royalty-free-image/134438141">Stockzilla via Getty Images</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>A wildfire fueled by dry, windy conditions forced <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2022/04/20/us/arizona-tunnel-fire-wednesday/index.html">hundreds of people to evacuate homes in Arizona</a> in mid-April, following fires that <a href="https://www.npr.org/2022/04/16/1093194355/wildfires-new-mexico-ruidoso-mcbride-fire">destroyed more than 200 homes in New Mexico</a> and <a href="https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/wildfire-southwest-boulder-forces-1200-evacuations-83693090">threatened</a> <a href="https://www.nbcdfw.com/weather/weather-connection/wildfires-force-evacuation-orders-for-three-north-texas-counties/2919734/">communities</a> <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-a-hurricane-fueled-wildfires-in-the-florida-panhandle-178999">in several other states</a> over the previous weeks. It was another reminder to be prepared for what U.S. forecasters warned <a href="https://www.noaa.gov/news/spring-outlook-drought-to-expand-amid-warmer-conditions">would be a risky spring</a> for wildfires.</p>
<p>I’m a <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=Wx4oSuoAAAAJ&hl=en">fire ecologist</a> and director of the <a href="https://southernfireexchange.org/">Southern Fire Exchange</a> for the University of Florida. Here are six terms you’ll often hear when people talk about wildfires that are useful to understand, both for <a href="https://wildfirerisk.org/">preparing</a> for fire season and gauging the risk when fires start.</p>
<h2>Percent contained</h2>
<p>Imagine looking down at a wildfire from an airplane. Firefighters want to build a perimeter around that fire with control lines, or firebreaks – areas cleared of vegetation – that they hope will prevent the fire from spreading. </p>
<p>Getting <a href="https://www.doi.gov/wildlandfire/suppression">100% containment is the goal</a>, but it takes some time to get there, and a wildfire is a moving target.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Firefighters with hand tools to clear a path about four feet wide among the trees." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/451462/original/file-20220310-19-1bacoa0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/451462/original/file-20220310-19-1bacoa0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/451462/original/file-20220310-19-1bacoa0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/451462/original/file-20220310-19-1bacoa0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/451462/original/file-20220310-19-1bacoa0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/451462/original/file-20220310-19-1bacoa0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/451462/original/file-20220310-19-1bacoa0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Fire crews clear a containment line, removing any potential fuel, to try to keep a fire from spreading. Bulldozers are often used to create firebreaks in grasslands.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://newsroom.ap.org/detail/YellowstoneWildfires/2dbf00f01a234f1398f016354c7fc030/photo">Derek Wittenberg/National Forest Service via AP</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Having 100% containment doesn’t mean the fire is out. It just means the fire agency has containment lines around it. There can still be burning, smoldering and active flames. When conditions are hot, dry and windy, embers can blow across the fire lines and cause <a href="https://www.nwcg.gov/publications/pms437/crown-fire/spotting-fire-behavior">spotting</a> – fires started by those blowing embers. </p>
<p>In the end, it’s Mother Nature that typically puts large fires out for good, and it may be weeks or months before they are officially declared out.</p>
<h2>Red flag warning</h2>
<p>A <a href="https://www.weather.gov/media/lmk/pdf/what_is_a_red_flag_warning.pdf">red flag warning</a> means weather conditions are expected that would raise the risk of dangerous wildfires spreading.</p>
<p>You’ll hear the phrase red flag warning <a href="https://www.fire.ca.gov/programs/communications/red-flag-warnings-fire-weather-watches/">used across the country</a>, but the criteria actually vary by geographic location. <a href="https://www.fdacs.gov/Forest-Wildfire/Wildland-Fire/Fire-Weather/Links-and-Information/Red-Flags-for-Fire-Weather-Conditions-in-Florida">For north Florida</a>, for example, a red flag warning is triggered when relative humidity is at or below 28%, winds are 15 miles per hour or above, and the fire has met a threshold in the Forest Service’s risk calculations known as <a href="https://www.fdacs.gov/Forest-Wildfire/Wildland-Fire/Fire-Weather/Links-and-Information/Wildland-Fire-Danger-Index-FDI/Wildland-Fire-Danger-Index-FDI-FAQ/What-is-the-Energy-Release-Component-ERC">energy release component, or ERC</a>. In the Boulder, Colorado, area, the National Weather Service’s <a href="https://www.weather.gov/bou/RFW_Definitions">criteria for a red flag warning</a> include frequent wind gusts of at least 25 mph and 15% relative humidity or less. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/9EprnWrMNpw?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">The Weather Channel explains how wildfire risk is increasing.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>It’s really important that people <a href="https://wildfirerisk.org/">understand and respond to fire weather warnings appropriately</a>. Most wildfires are <a href="https://theconversation.com/humans-ignite-almost-every-wildfire-that-threatens-homes-145997">caused by people</a>. When red flag conditions are forecast, that’s really not the time to be burning leaves in the backyard or building a campfire.</p>
<h2>Fuel</h2>
<p>Fuel refers to all the <a href="https://www.doi.gov/wildlandfire/fuels">vegetative material</a> that’s available to burn. It can be everything from leaves, twigs, grasses and sticks to bushes and shrubs and heavy logs on the ground.</p>
<p>It can be dead fuel or <a href="https://www.nwcg.gov/publications/pms437/fuel-moisture/live-fuel-moisture-content">live fuel</a>. The threat posed by live fuels also varies by region. In the Western U.S., grasses are typically available to burn only once they go dormant and dry out. In the Southeast, however, live fuels like palmetto and grasses will still burn quite readily because of their volatile oils. </p>
<h2>Backfires</h2>
<p>During a wildfire, you’ll hear fire managers and firefighters talking about “burnouts” or “backfires.” Those are fires that are <a href="https://ctif.org/news/prevention-control-using-back-fire-combat-wildfire">intentionally lit</a> and allowed to spread toward the wildfire. </p>
<p>By burning off vegetation ahead of the wildfire, firefighters leave the wildfire with less fuel to burn in hopes of either stopping it or reducing its intensity.</p>
<h2>Prescribed burns</h2>
<p>Prescribed fires are similar to backfires, but they’re used well before a wildfire can start. <a href="https://www.nps.gov/articles/what-is-a-prescribed-fire.htm">Prescribed fires</a> are intentionally lit under conditions considered safe, such as when winds are low and it’s not too dry. Like backfires, they are used to clear away excess fuel. </p>
<p>A prescribed burn has a prescription – a written plan that specifies the ranges of weather conditions that fire managers anticipate will be acceptable for using and then extinguishing the fires, as well as the resources needed to accomplish it successfully and the intended outcomes and objectives of the burn. In some areas, it can take years to write a plan and execute it. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/E542gY7uR0s?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">The U.S. Forest Service shows how prescribed burns work.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Prescribed burns have <a href="https://www.fs.usda.gov/detail/sierra/landmanagement/?cid=stelprdb5442511">additional benefits</a>. They allow forest managers to reduce fuels in a way that can also promote good wildlife habitats and healthy ecosystems. Prescribed fires apply the positive aspects of fire in the safest way possible.</p>
<h2>Complex fires</h2>
<p>The term “complex” when talking about wildfires is purely about management. When you have a number of fires in a geographic area, instead of having an incident management team at each fire, for simplicity they’ll call it a <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2020/10/06/us/gigafire-california-august-complex-trnd/index.html">complex</a> and have one incident management team responsible for all of it. </p>
<p>In the Florida Panhandle fires in March 2022, for example, three fires were burning in a relatively close area, but the same fire teams were involved, so they <a href="https://www.fdacs.gov/News-Events/Press-Releases/2022-Press-Releases/Chipola-Complex-Morning-Update-Monday-March-7">opted to manage it as a complex</a>. Similarly, a group of Texas fires later that month were named the <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/texas-eastland-complex-fire-balloons-4-7-blazes-burning-nearly-55000-a-rcna20827">Eastland Complex</a>.</p>
<p>Are you looking for other <a href="https://www.fs.fed.us/nwacfire/home/terminology.html#F">wildfire terms</a>? The National Wildfire Coordinating Group is the <a href="https://www.nwcg.gov/glossary/a-z">master resource</a>.</p>
<p>[<em>Over 150,000 readers rely on The Conversation’s newsletters to understand the world. <a href="https://memberservices.theconversation.com/newsletters/?source=inline-150ksignup">Sign up today</a></em>.]</p>
<p><em>This article was updated April 20, 2022, with the fire in Arizona.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/179002/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>David R. Godwin works for the University of Florida Institute for Food and Agricultural Sciences School of Forest, Fisheries, and Geomatic Sciences. He receives funding from the US Joint Fire Science Program in agreement with the USDA Forest Service Southern Research Station and the USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture. He is affiliated with the North Florida Prescribed Fire Council and the Southeast Regional Working Group of the National Cohesive Wildland Fire Management Strategy. </span></em></p>Dry, windy conditions have fueled destructive wildfires in Texas, Florida and other states in 2022. Understanding these terms can help people in fire-risk areas prepare.David Godwin, Director of the Southern Fire Exchange, University of FloridaLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1671722021-10-26T19:02:49Z2021-10-26T19:02:49ZA quick guide to climate change jargon – what experts mean by mitigation, carbon neutral and 6 other key terms<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/447901/original/file-20220222-27-nvtrlb.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=264%2C180%2C1234%2C799&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Climate jargon can feel overwhelming.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Illustration by Dennis Lan/USC</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">CC BY-ND</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>When scientists and policy writers talk about climate change, a lot of technical terms get tossed around: adaptation, carbon neutral, sustainable development. The language can feel overwhelming.</p>
<p>“It sounds like you’re talking over people,” one person said of the terminology during a <a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10584-021-03183-0">recent study</a> colleagues and I conducted through the <a href="https://publicexchange.usc.edu/">USC Dornsife Public Exchange</a>.</p>
<p>Authoritative reports about climate change can be difficult for nonscientists to understand. With the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change releasing new reports on <a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/report/sixth-assessment-report-working-group-3/">mitigation</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/transformational-change-is-coming-to-how-people-live-on-earth-un-climate-adaptation-report-warns-which-path-will-humanity-choose-177604">adaptation</a>, we thought it would be helpful to clarify some of the most common terms used to describe climate change.</p>
<p>We interviewed 20 people about common terms used by climate scientists and climate journalists. We then used their feedback to explain those terms in everyday language. With the help of the <a href="https://unfoundation.org/what-we-do/issues/climate-and-energy/climate-science/">United Nations Foundation</a>, we chose eight terms from reports written by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. </p>
<p>Here’s a guide that may help you to follow the news about climate change. The explanation of each term starts with the technical definition from the IPCC. The text that follows puts it into plain language.</p>
<h2>1. Mitigation</h2>
<p>IPCC definition: Mitigation (of climate change): a human intervention to reduce emissions or enhance the sinks of greenhouse gases.</p>
<p>Translation: Stopping climate change from getting worse.</p>
<p>When people talk about “mitigation” they often focus on fossil fuels – coal, oil and natural gas – used to make electricity and run cars, buses and planes. Fossil fuels produce greenhouse gases, including carbon dioxide. When these gases are released, they linger in the atmosphere. <a href="https://scied.ucar.edu/learning-zone/how-climate-works/greenhouse-effect">They then trap heat and warm the planet</a>.</p>
<p>Some ways to mitigate climate change include using solar and wind power instead of coal-fired power plants; making buildings, appliances and vehicles more energy efficient so they use less electricity and fuel; and designing cities so people have to drive less. Protecting forests and planting trees also help because trees <a href="https://sgp.fas.org/crs/misc/IF11404.pdf">absorb greenhouse gases from the atmosphere</a> and lock them away.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Rows of solar panels curve along a hillside with mountains in the background." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/428081/original/file-20211022-28-pz2o3j.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/428081/original/file-20211022-28-pz2o3j.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=382&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/428081/original/file-20211022-28-pz2o3j.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=382&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/428081/original/file-20211022-28-pz2o3j.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=382&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/428081/original/file-20211022-28-pz2o3j.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=480&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/428081/original/file-20211022-28-pz2o3j.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=480&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/428081/original/file-20211022-28-pz2o3j.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=480&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Use of solar power as an alternative to fossil fuels is growing.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/view-shows-photovoltaic-solar-pannels-at-the-power-plant-in-news-photo/1137858606">Gerard Julien/AFP via Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>2. Adaptation</h2>
<p>IPCC definition: In human systems, the process of adjustment to actual or expected climate and its effects, in order to moderate harm or exploit beneficial opportunities. In natural systems, the process of adjustment to actual climate and its effects; human intervention may facilitate adjustment to expected climate and its effects.</p>
<p>Translation: Making changes to live with the impacts of climate change.</p>
<p><a href="https://royalsociety.org/topics-policy/projects/climate-change-evidence-causes/question-13/">Climate change is already happening.</a> Heat waves, wildfires and floods are getting worse. People will have to find ways to live with these threats. Los Angeles, for example, is <a href="https://www.cityplants.org/our-story/">planting trees</a> to help people stay cooler. Coastal cities like Miami may need <a href="https://theconversation.com/a-20-foot-sea-wall-wont-save-miami-how-living-structures-can-help-protect-the-coast-and-keep-the-paradise-vibe-165076">sea walls</a> to protect against floods. More “adaptation” actions will be needed as climate change gets worse.</p>
<h2>3. Carbon dioxide removal</h2>
<p>IPCC definition: Carbon dioxide removal methods refer to processes that <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-we-cant-reverse-climate-change-with-negative-emissions-technologies-103504">remove CO2</a> from the atmosphere by either increasing biological sinks of CO2 or using chemical processes to directly bind CO2. CDR is classified as a special type of mitigation. </p>
<p>Translation: Taking carbon dioxide out of the air.</p>
<p>The amount of carbon dioxide in the air has been increasing for many years. In 2019, there was <a href="https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/about-us/press-office/news/weather-and-climate/2021/2021-carbon-dioxide-forecast">50% more</a> more of it than in the late 1700s. <a href="https://theconversation.com/planting-trees-must-be-done-with-care-it-can-create-more-problems-than-it-addresses-128259">Planting trees</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/regenerative-agriculture-can-make-farmers-stewards-of-the-land-again-110570">restoring grasslands</a> can remove carbon dioxide from the air. There are also carbon dioxide removal technologies that <a href="https://theconversation.com/these-machines-scrub-greenhouse-gases-from-the-air-an-inventor-of-direct-air-capture-technology-shows-how-it-works-172306">store it underground</a> or <a href="https://theconversation.com/bendable-concrete-and-other-co2-infused-cement-mixes-could-dramatically-cut-global-emissions-152544">in concrete</a>, but these are new and not widely used.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="A machine with an intake and tubes behind two men talking." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/427157/original/file-20211019-22-10mn5ec.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/427157/original/file-20211019-22-10mn5ec.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/427157/original/file-20211019-22-10mn5ec.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/427157/original/file-20211019-22-10mn5ec.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/427157/original/file-20211019-22-10mn5ec.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/427157/original/file-20211019-22-10mn5ec.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/427157/original/file-20211019-22-10mn5ec.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Washington Gov. Jay Inslee discusses equipment that can remove carbon dioxide from the air.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/govinslee/38394487681/in/photolist-2kTqfDL-2iAkN5S-21uMMxx-Dn1S5W-21uMLBK">Gov. Jay Inslee/Flickr</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>4. Carbon neutral</h2>
<p>IPCC definition: Carbon neutrality is achieved when anthropogenic CO2 emissions are balanced globally by anthropogenic carbon dioxide removals over a specified period. Carbon neutrality is also referred to as net-zero carbon dioxide emission.</p>
<p>Translation: Adding no net carbon dioxide into the air. This does not have to mean that you can’t add any carbon dioxide. It means that if you do add carbon dioxide into the air you take out the same amount.</p>
<p>The IPCC warns that the world needs to be <a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/2018/10/08/summary-for-policymakers-of-ipcc-special-report-on-global-warming-of-1-5c-approved-by-governments/">carbon neutral by 2050</a> to avoid a serious climate crisis. This means using both “mitigation” to reduce the amount of carbon dioxide added to the air and “carbon dioxide removal” to take carbon dioxide out of the air.</p>
<h2>5. Tipping point</h2>
<p>IPCC definition: A level of change in system properties beyond which a system reorganizes, often abruptly, and does not return to the initial state even if the drivers of the change are abated. For the climate system, it refers to a critical threshold when global or regional climate changes from one stable state to another stable state.</p>
<p>Translation: When it is too late to stop effects of climate change.</p>
<p>One of the most talked-about tipping points involves the collapse of the West Antarctic ice sheet. Some research suggests it <a href="https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.abd7254">may have already started happening</a>. West Antarctica alone holds enough ice to raise sea levels worldwide by <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/guest-post-how-close-is-the-west-antarctic-ice-sheet-to-a-tipping-point">about 11 feet</a> (3.3 meters). If all glaciers and ice caps melt, sea levels will end up rising about <a href="https://www.usgs.gov/faqs/how-would-sea-level-change-if-all-glaciers-melted?qt-news_science_products=0#qt-news_science_products">230 feet</a> (70 meters). </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/sXOi1MR0-Yw?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">Why the West Antarctic ice sheet may have passed a tipping point.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>6. Unprecedented transition</h2>
<p>IPCC definition for “transition”: The process of changing from one state or condition to another in a given period of time. Transition can be in individuals, firms, cities, regions and nations and can be based on incremental or transformative change.</p>
<p>Translation: Making big changes together to stop climate change – in a way that has not been seen before.</p>
<p>In 2015, <a href="https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/the-paris-agreement/the-paris-agreement">countries around the world agreed</a> to try to keep the planet from warming more than 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 F). Among the <a href="https://ar5-syr.ipcc.ch/ipcc/sites/default/files/AR5_SYR_Figure_1.7.png">biggest sources of global warming</a> are coal-fired power plants. Quickly shifting the world to renewable energy, such as wind and solar power, would be an unprecedented transition. Without big changes, climate change could make the world unlivable.</p>
<h2>7. Sustainable development</h2>
<p>IPCC definition: Development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs and balances social, economic and environmental concerns.</p>
<p>Translation: Living in a way that is good for people alive today and for people in the future.</p>
<p>The United Nations has shared <a href="https://sdgs.un.org/goals">“sustainable development goals.”</a> These goals aim to help countries grow in ways that are healthy for both people and the environment. Producing more carbon dioxide than the planet can manage is an example of unsustainable development that’s <a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/">causing climate change</a>. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="A chart of CO2 concentrations based on ice core reconstructions and modern observations" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/427158/original/file-20211019-18-fkodu7.gif?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/427158/original/file-20211019-18-fkodu7.gif?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/427158/original/file-20211019-18-fkodu7.gif?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/427158/original/file-20211019-18-fkodu7.gif?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/427158/original/file-20211019-18-fkodu7.gif?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=501&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/427158/original/file-20211019-18-fkodu7.gif?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=501&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/427158/original/file-20211019-18-fkodu7.gif?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=501&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Levels of carbon dioxide in the air have risen quickly over the past 70 years.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/carbon-dioxide/">NOAA</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>8. Abrupt change</h2>
<p>IPCC definition: Abrupt climate change refers to a large-scale change in the climate system that takes place over a few decades or less, persists (or is anticipated to persist) for at least a few decades and causes substantial disruptions in human and natural systems.</p>
<p>Translation: A change in climate that happens much faster than it normally would.</p>
<p>[<em>Over 140,000 readers rely on The Conversation’s newsletters to understand the world.</em> <a href="https://memberservices.theconversation.com/newsletters/?source=inline-140ksignup">Sign up today</a>.]</p>
<p>Our world is changing quickly as a result of climate change. Wildfires are raging in parts of the Western U.S. <a href="https://www.pnas.org/content/118/22/e2009717118">that were once too wet to burn</a>. Coral reefs are <a href="https://www.iucn.org/resources/issues-briefs/coral-reefs-and-climate-change">dying as the ocean is getting warmer</a>. These changes would not have happened so quickly – or at all – were it not for climate change. </p>
<p><em>Lance Ignon, a former communications adviser for the IPCC and now senior associate dean for strategic initiatives and communication at USC Dornsife and a co-author of the paper with <a href="https://priceschool.usc.edu/people/wandi-bruine-de-bruin/">Wändi Bruine de Bruin</a>, <a href="https://cesr.usc.edu/people/staff/lilarabi">Lila Rabinovich</a>, <a href="https://dornsife.usc.edu/kate-weber/">Kate Weber</a> <a href="https://publicexchange.usc.edu/about-us/">Marianna Babboni</a> and <a href="https://unfoundation.org/author/monica-dean/">Monica Dean</a>, contributed to this article.</em> </p>
<p><em>This article was updated Feb. 28, 2022, with the new IPCC report.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/167172/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Wändi Bruine de Bruin has received support from the University of Southern California Dornsife College Public Exchange and the Center for Climate and Energy Decision Making (CEDM) through a cooperative agreement between the National Science Foundation and Carnegie Mellon University. This project is a collaboration between the University of Southern California and the United Nations Foundation.</span></em></p>The language around climate change can feel overwhelming. A psychology and public policy expert breaks it down in plain English.Wändi Bruine de Bruin, Professor of Public Policy, Psychology and Behavioral Science, USC Sol Price School of Public Policy, USC Dornsife College of Letters, Arts and SciencesLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1481182020-10-15T12:57:02Z2020-10-15T12:57:02ZIn defence of jargon – it might be infuriating but it also has its uses<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/363667/original/file-20201015-23-1u0opxr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-illustration/many-people-speak-together-91734869">lolloj / Shutterstock.com</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Anyone who tried to get their head around the financial crisis of 2008 soon found themselves drowning in an alphabet soup of BEITs, CDOs, CDCs, ETFs and MBS. When British novelist John Lanchester wrote about this world <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/08/04/money-talks-6">he commented</a> that “you are left wondering whether somebody is trying to con you, or to obfuscate and blather so that you can’t tell what’s being talked about”. He wasn’t wrong. </p>
<iframe id="noa-web-audio-player" style="border: none" src="https://embed-player.newsoveraudio.com/v4?key=x84olp&id=https://theconversation.com/in-defence-of-jargon-it-might-be-infuriating-but-it-also-has-its-uses-148118&bgColor=F5F5F5&color=D8352A&playColor=D8352A" width="100%" height="110px"></iframe>
<p>One <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0749597820303666">recent study</a> shows how people are more likely to use jargon when they feel insecure. Led by psychologist Zachariah Brown, it shows how some groups use jargon specifically to make up for having a low social status. </p>
<p>In one experiment, they looked at 64,000 dissertations from hundreds of universities in the US and found that those written by students from lower-status institutions used more jargon. In another part of the study, they asked participants to pick a pitch for a start-up. When people were put into a lower-status position, they found they were more likely to pick jargon-laden pitches. In a range of other settings they noticed that when people found themselves in a low-status position, they were significantly more likely to reach for jargon. </p>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="Speech bubble saying: " src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/363671/original/file-20201015-21-1wozab.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/363671/original/file-20201015-21-1wozab.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/363671/original/file-20201015-21-1wozab.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/363671/original/file-20201015-21-1wozab.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/363671/original/file-20201015-21-1wozab.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/363671/original/file-20201015-21-1wozab.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/363671/original/file-20201015-21-1wozab.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">No thanks.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-vector/business-buzzword-enthusiastically-incentivize-usercentric-emarkets-611958686">one line man/Shutterstock.com</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Clearly, there are pitfalls to jargon. Research shows how it can be a major turnoff in the business world. One study found that knowledgeable investors were unimpressed by investment propositions that <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0165410119300163">were filled with unnecessary jargon</a>. Similarly, jargon can make non-experts see new technologies in a more negative light. Another study found that when new technologies are presented to people using jargon, they tend to see them <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0963662519865687?casa_token=jE0EeUQ2vFMAAAAA%3Ai1VsG5JtLYDuiw2VGWLDCHTJoJ2JS52xetBMfNEeu3_Z8oZL50P_yZz9PkFvTApfs-bKkbTolkxz">as much riskier</a>. </p>
<p>Jargon is, by definition, exclusionary. This means it can get in the way of understanding crucial information. One study found that the frequent use of medical jargon by doctors meant their patients didn’t understand about <a href="https://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/png/ajhb/2007/00000031/a00100s1/art00011">half of what their doctors said to them</a>. </p>
<p>Even between experts, it can be counterproductive. A <a href="http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.721.2591&rep=rep1&type=pdf">study of different subfields in ecology</a>, for example, found that key terms would often mean very different things to different experts. This would then trigger heated but ultimately fruitless disagreements. </p>
<h2>The upside of jargon</h2>
<p>Jargon might be infuriating, but it’s also useful. Jargon sums up complex issues in fewer words. This enables experts to talk precisely to each other about concepts they are familiar with. </p>
<p>Jargon can help remove emotion when tackling difficult topics. Doctors, for example, often dehumanise patients by talking about a person in pain as an interesting case of some specific disease. Research shows that this helps create emotional distance, which allows them <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1745691611429706">to make more reasonable decisions</a>. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Two doctors looking at clipboard." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/363673/original/file-20201015-23-eee1u1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/363673/original/file-20201015-23-eee1u1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/363673/original/file-20201015-23-eee1u1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/363673/original/file-20201015-23-eee1u1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/363673/original/file-20201015-23-eee1u1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/363673/original/file-20201015-23-eee1u1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/363673/original/file-20201015-23-eee1u1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Jargon has its place.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/doctor-giving-his-younger-colleagues-piece-113416138">Shutterstock.com</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>But this can also be problematic. In 1984 the US State Department replaced the word “killing” with <a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/42579392?mag=the-tangled-language-of-jargon&seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents">“unlawful deprivation of life”</a> in its human rights reports to help cover up the unpleasant reality of government-sanctioned killings in countries the US supports.</p>
<p>Jargon is also used to solidify a sense of belonging within groups. <a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/3050508">Professional wrestlers</a>, for instance, talk about their sport as “business”, getting into the ring as “going to work”, and putting on a convincing performance as “selling”. Similarly, North American truck drivers use expressions like “bobtailing a twin screw jimmy” to purposefully exclude non-truck drivers <a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/454584?seq=1">from their conversations</a>.</p>
<h2>Resisting a full ban</h2>
<p>The dangers of jargon have spurred frequent calls to ban it altogether. In 2015, the then British prime minister, David Cameron asked civil servants <a href="https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/david-cameron-tells-civil-service-use-simple-language-when-communicating-ministers-10391681.html">to ensure their communications were jargon free</a>. In 2010, then US president, Barack Obama signed the <a href="https://www.dni.gov/index.php/plain-language-act">Plain Language Act</a> which required federal government documents to be written in a “clear, concise manner”. Presidents Nixon, Carter and Clinton all signed official orders requiring simple and plain language <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/pushing-the-government-to-speak-plainly/2011/11/18/gIQA7TmpLO_story.html">be used in government</a>. </p>
<p>These world leaders were all following in the footsteps of George Orwell who in 1946 <a href="http://www.public-library.uk/ebooks/72/30.pdf">recommended</a> that you “never use a long word where a short one will do”. But Orwell’s advice was preceded by Thomas Sprat, who in 1667 wrote how members of the newly founded Royal Society resolved “to reject all the amplifications, digressions, and swelling of style: to return back to the primitive purity, and shortness, when men deliver’d so many things, almost in an equal number of words”. </p>
<p>Despite these constant calls for plain language, jargon seems to have a habit of returning. Instead of trying to take on the impossible task of creating a jargon-free world, we might narrow our ambitions and just try to cut out what the scholar Russel Hirst calls <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.2190/j8jj-4yd0-4r00-g5n0">“bad jargon”</a>. </p>
<p>Some potential indicators of bad jargon are words that look or sound strange, hybrids or terms that are difficult to pronounce. After chasing out the bad jargon, we need to ensure that any specialist terms which are left are “good jargon”. That means they should be economical, precise and as universal as possible. Instead of fighting against all jargon, we should follow Russell Hirst’s advice and become champions of good jargon and its staunchest defenders.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/148118/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Andre Spicer does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Differentiating between bad jargon and good jargon.Andre Spicer, Professor of Organisational Behaviour, Cass Business School, City, University of LondonLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/890122018-01-01T22:37:33Z2018-01-01T22:37:33Z13 ‘ye olde’ phrases that would be far better in the workplace<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/199882/original/file-20171219-27568-14e9v80.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C0%2C3000%2C1500&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Wes Mountain/The Conversation</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">CC BY-ND</a></span></figcaption></figure><p><em>The piece around workplace jargon is moving forward, with the team hitting the ground running. We’ve got our ducks in a row, have drilled down into our learnings — let’s run it up the flagpole and see the result.</em></p>
<p>Clearly we need to enter 2018 with a fresh set of expressions for the workplace.</p>
<p>Now, I could suggest some spanking-new ones, but lexical novelty comes with risks — besides, we’re all a bit weary of innovation in the workplace. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/catchphrase-to-cliche-how-corporate-speak-became-common-in-our-everyday-lives-73437">Catchphrase to cliché: how corporate-speak became common in our everyday lives</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>So in the spirit of recycling, I suggest we recruit golden oldies to inject energy into modern managerial jargon, some linguistic gems from the past that deserve a second go. </p>
<h2>Reaching out with saucy oars</h2>
<p>Linguistic bugbears are always in the eye of beholder, but <em>singing from the same hymn sheet</em> seems to get up most noses. Old nautical jargon might be just what’s needed here, specifically — <em>in the quill</em> or <em>jumping in quill</em>. These are expressions that also meant “working in harmony”. </p>
<p>The quill here isn’t a feather, but an early version of coil (of rope). If you’re all <em>jumping in quill</em>, you’re nicely coiled up in concentric rings, so no need for <em>synergizing</em> either.</p>
<p>The world of business has also given us <em>out over one’s skis</em>. The message is “don’t get too far ahead of yourself”. Skiers I gather are irritated by this one because they feel the imagery is wrong, and those of us who aren’t into winter sports are simply confused.</p>
<p>If the idea is acting prematurely or recklessly, can I suggest we resurrect another couple of nautical expressions? Ships or boats that were rashly venturing were once said to be <em>with saucy rigging</em> or <em>with saucy oars</em> — titillating images for a change: </p>
<p>“They might have been sailing <em>with saucy rigging</em> with that restructure.” </p>
<h2>Being loaded for bears when you hit the floor running</h2>
<p>Something that makes regular appearances in our workplace memos is <em>getting your ducks in a row</em>, in other words, being organised. <a href="http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-duc5.htm">Its origin isn’t clear</a> — ceramic flying ducks on a wall, rows of mechanical ducks at the fairground, balls (sitting ducks) lined up to be potted on the pool table.</p>
<p>It could also relate to real live ducks close together and about to be shot, or even the mother duck with her brood. All were possible inspirations. </p>
<p>I’m very tempted to suggest the incorporation of another duck expression here, the 17th century curiosity <em>anatiferous</em> “producing ducks” (from Latin <em>anas</em> (<em>anati</em>) “duck” + <em>ferus</em> “making”)?</p>
<p>But I suspect we need a stronger image for the modern corporate world. So how about <em>being loaded for bear(s)</em>, a North American expression from the 19th century that also meant being fully prepared? Here you have to imagine hunters geared up for an bear encounter. </p>
<p>If you’re <em>loaded for bears</em> before the next meeting, you’re ready for anything. </p>
<h2>Ideating or bethinking outside the box</h2>
<p><a href="https://books.google.de/books/about/Skills_of_Workplace_Communication.html?id=ZsY2aaHMyYoC&redir_esc=y">The message from many management gurus</a> is that plain and simple English words are what we need to achieve clear communication, and in the interests of de-jargonising modern corporate-speak we could even revive a few. </p>
<p><em>Sibsomeness</em>, <em>somredness</em>, <em>onehead</em>, <em>onehood</em> all once referred to different aspects of unity of spirit, mind and action. While they lack the profitable association of <em>corporate synergy</em>, that meaning can be supplied: </p>
<p>“The team work resulted in a <em>sibsomeness</em> that was very productive.”</p>
<p>We like to investigate matters meticulously but are thoroughly sick of <em>drilling down</em> or <em>peeling the onion</em>. Now, we could bring back <em>bolting the flour</em> with its different image of a bolting-cloth or sieve. But why not Old English <em>through-seek</em>, with more or less the same meaning and a one thousand year-old pedigree.</p>
<p>The English word <em>furtherhead</em> was overwhelmed by French-inspired <em>priorities</em> and <em>prioritize</em>, and never took off. But as something that can be both noun and verb, it’s a handy replacement for these two foreign-derived expressions: </p>
<p>“The department has failed to <em>futherhead</em> safety within the industry.”</p>
<h2>Ferking forthward</h2>
<p>Let me finish with <em>going forward</em>, a kind of sentence tag that I equate with the teaspoonful of sugar following <a href="https://theconversation.com/catchphrase-to-cliche-how-corporate-speak-became-common-in-our-everyday-lives-73437">the tablespoonful of cod liver oil</a>: </p>
<p>“This is our strategy <em>going forward</em>.” </p>
<p>There’s a fine Old English expression that could replace this overworked corporate morale booster — <em>ferking forthward</em> meaning moving forward, or helping something on its way. </p>
<p>In the modern version of the verb, prepositions are flexible. And whether it’s <em>ferking out</em>, <em>up</em>, <em>off</em> or <em>forward</em>, <a href="http://www.oed.com">throughout its long and complicated life</a> this verb has always had direction, action and bucket loads of purpose at its core:</p>
<p>“This ongoing restructuring of the business is a necessary step in creating a leaner organisation <em>ferking up</em>.” </p>
<p>There’s a little extra something here, too. It comes from the subtle vowel change that during the 16th century transformed ancient <em>ferk</em> to the modern-day <em>F-word</em> (undoubtedly this transition was assisted by other sources — <a href="https://books.google.de/books/about/Euphemism_and_Dysphemism.html?id=YBtQPgAACAAJ&redir_esc=y">successful expressions are usually mongrels</a>). </p>
<p>Now, I know it’s easy to tilt at the jargon of others. But when expressions start doing something to people’s neck hairs, it’s time to let them go.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/89012/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Kate Burridge does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>We need to enter 2018 with a fresh set of expressions for the workplace.Kate Burridge, Professor of Linguistics, Monash UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/674692016-11-18T10:43:33Z2016-11-18T10:43:33ZHealth literacy can be a matter of life or death<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/146110/original/image-20161115-31144-1qlu1rx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption"></span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-327109946/stock-photo-doctor-helping-patient-with-medication.html?src=deRvlzuIhiD69yVWyjoh9g-1-0">Phovoir/Shutterstock.com</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>The basic ability to read is essential in looking after one’s health, especially when managing a chronic illness that requires various treatments and medications. It is estimated that patients with low health literacy cost anywhere from <a href="http://publichealth.gwu.edu/departments/healthpolicy/CHPR/downloads/LowHealthLiteracyReport10_4_07.pdf">US$106 billion to US$238 billion</a> each year in the US alone, which equates to roughly 10% of the healthcare budget. In the UK, it’s estimated that the financial cost of low health literacy is <a href="https://www.england.nhs.uk/2016/10/jonathan-berry/">3% to 5%</a> of the yearly NHS budget.</p>
<p><a href="https://health.gov/communication/literacy/quickguide/factsbasic.htm">Health literacy</a> is defined as the degree to which a person has the capacity to obtain, process and comprehend health information in order to make decisions about their own health. Around <a href="http://www.aafp.org/afp/2015/0715/p118.html">75% of health information</a> is written at a high school to undergraduate reading level. </p>
<p>This presents serious problems – take the US for example, where the average reading ability of adults is between grade 8 and 9, with around a quarter of adults reading at a <a href="http://literacyprojectfoundation.org/community/statistics/">grade 5 level</a> and below. In England, the current research shows that <a href="https://www.england.nhs.uk/2016/10/jonathan-berry/">approximately 43% to 61%</a> of English working age adults regularly experience problems understanding health information. </p>
<p>As a result, most healthcare information is written at a level more advanced than the reader’s ability. Imagine the anxiety caused by not understanding what your doctor has said, or by being puzzled by your prescription, all with the knowledge that your health is at stake. Or if you’re a parent and making the health decisions for your child, that you could end up making a mistake that puts them at risk. </p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"772149141346611200"}"></div></p>
<p>Hospitals and other healthcare facilities can be stressful, daunting places. They’re often very busy with a distracting amount of information that all demand your attention. The health literacy standards of these environments are often mismatched with the health literacy levels of the patients using them, especially when it comes to signage. A problem faced by participants in one study was that the clinic they were looking for was given <a href="https://www.researchgate.net/publication/299066586_A_Health_Literacy_Walk_Through_a_Paediatric_Neurology_Service">three distinct names</a>: one in their appointment letter, one in the hospital directory and a different one again in the signposts. </p>
<p>When navigating a healthcare facility, a patient is expected to be able to read and understand a wide range of written information, from appointment letters to complex consent and medical history forms to information pamphlets and maps. Many patients are unable to make sense of these <a>sources of information</a>, leading to late or missed appointments, dissatisfaction with the facility and, in the worst case, a decision to end their treatment. </p>
<h2>The problem of jargon</h2>
<p>We all come across jargon in the workplace, probably on a daily basis. Yet the use of jargon by doctors and other medical staff can be troubling. It’s easy for doctors to forget that most of their patients don’t have the same education, training and years of experience that they do, and that the complex terms they’re familiar with might sound like a foreign language to others. A patient being told that they have “renal adenoma” or “a benign kidney tumor” can be misunderstood, causing them pointless worry. A less extreme example would be using “hypertension” in the place of “high blood pressure” when the latter is more commonly understood. </p>
<p>Patients with low levels of health literacy are more likely to make mistakes with their <a href="https://www.stfm.org/fmhub/fm2004/september/lisa588.pdf">medication</a> and often misread the instructions. Instructions such as “take two pills twice a day” can be misread, with research showing that fewer mistakes were made if phrased “<a href="http://www.aafp.org/afp/2013/0601/p755.pdf">take two pills with breakfast and two pills with dinner</a>”. Most research in this area found that around half of patients were recorded as misunderstanding their medication’s purpose, the frequency taken, or the specific dosage instructions involved. Errors with medication can be very dangerous for patients, even life threatening in some cases. </p>
<p>The concept of health literacy was first introduced in the 1970s, so it’s still a fairly new field of research, but it has been gaining traction in recent years. It’s hoped that future research will highlight this as a significant area of concern, instigating the changes necessary to accommodate those with low health literacy.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/67469/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Keegan Clay Shepard does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Most healthcare information is written at a level more advanced than the reader’s ability.Keegan Clay Shepard, Postdoctoral Research Associate, University of OxfordLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/614432016-06-29T11:56:49Z2016-06-29T11:56:49ZLooking under the bonnet of annoying management speak<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/128550/original/image-20160628-7819-1qbq41o.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Brave new world? We should embrace language that gets things done.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock/Rawpixel.com</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Poking fun <a href="http://www.express.co.uk/life-style/life/628608/Top-50-annoying-office-jargo-how-many-do-you-use">at corporate jargon</a> is on trend. <a href="http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/weird-news/your-boss-say-this-top-7172172">Newspapers</a> and <a href="http://www.forbes.com/pictures/ekij45gdh/most-annoying-business-jargon/">online publications</a> get a kick out of compiling extensive lists of the <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/10-of-the-most-annoying-corporate-jargon-phrases-that-you-should-never-use-at-work-a6790701.html">most egregious examples</a> and the overarching narrative is that we should puncture the pomposity that this “management speak” is deemed to represent.</p>
<p>To its critics, this new language of business is seen as a tool for making things seem more <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/careers/careers-blog/worst-office-jargon-phrases-staff-love-hate-management-speak">impressive than they are</a>. Phrases are dismissed as “meaningless lingo” or “lame euphemisms” and we are offered simplified, plain speaking versions instead. Sometimes, we are simply forbidden to use them.</p>
<p>But before we throw the baby out with bathwater – see what I did there? – we should stop to reconsider. What is the problem with this form of language? Why are we so annoyed by it? And why do so may of us keep using it?</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/128677/original/image-20160629-15285-11m7yen.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/128677/original/image-20160629-15285-11m7yen.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/128677/original/image-20160629-15285-11m7yen.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=348&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/128677/original/image-20160629-15285-11m7yen.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=348&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/128677/original/image-20160629-15285-11m7yen.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=348&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/128677/original/image-20160629-15285-11m7yen.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=438&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/128677/original/image-20160629-15285-11m7yen.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=438&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/128677/original/image-20160629-15285-11m7yen.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=438&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">You wouldn’t … would you?</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.shutterstock.com">Shutterstock/Jason L. Price</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Drilling down</h2>
<p>The first problem is a semantic one. There is a big difference between the various labels so liberally used in the media, so let’s get it straight. “Jargon” is the technical vocabulary used specifically in a particular organisation or within a specific community. Idiomatic language – or management/corporate speak – is a fixed set of expressions used typically in business contexts. </p>
<p>The latter are figures of speech which are normally recognised by everyone, if not enjoyed. I say “recognised” because it is not hard to see how the actual meaning of these words and phrases <a href="https://books.google.co.uk/books/about/Language_and_Creativity.html?id=dxHKpijtn6gC">might be hard to grasp</a> on the basis of their component parts. If we don’t understand them as a phrase, they simply will not make sense. We will be puzzled by “blue sky thinking”, “low hanging fruit”, “peeling an onion” or “drilling down”. Unless, of course, we make the effort and learn these phrases.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/128558/original/image-20160628-7851-vhibpw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/128558/original/image-20160628-7851-vhibpw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/128558/original/image-20160628-7851-vhibpw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=315&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/128558/original/image-20160628-7851-vhibpw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=315&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/128558/original/image-20160628-7851-vhibpw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=315&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/128558/original/image-20160628-7851-vhibpw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=396&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/128558/original/image-20160628-7851-vhibpw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=396&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/128558/original/image-20160628-7851-vhibpw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=396&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Ripe for the picking.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/waferboard/6008181807/in/photolist-a9Vv8v-uDPp8-4ozMQb-6fSXcE-76XiNk-9hR3h5-6fSSyE-6n4GLP-6fNEBM-4XJsbd-7oRT2c-4fc4KZ-6fSNzy-JqswvJ-jR9gc-5w9RHP-TkaJb-6fNCrV-6fNDGX-ffcLtM-aMRzuD-5f5x3K-gjtnZ-5U8Q5h-3V5Ye-62AXKt-5dVjoH-3Tv8x-8X3G4K-6xh7ZT-7fdiL7-kSqja-cWnZsj-qYKB1o-dAtJFS-bwYomx-7wWVc2-c6Kdk-7QcJFV-8JnJYw-4XsjzA-6SE665-66fc1X-hBFf2V-J8x3dx-d41fYw-58agTd-5Zdm8g-dnVAra-49AVJh">waferboard/Flickr</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>And doing just that shouldn’t be too hard. We use idiomatic expressions <a href="http://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/M/bo3637992.html">all the time</a>, from metaphors such as “spill the beans” to phrasal verbs when we “put up with somebody”. We use sayings such as the old favourite “throwing the baby out with the bathwater” and more subtle formulae such as “having said that”. Maybe the real question is why we expect the office to be an exception.</p>
<p>Is it at all possible that the blame for causing annoyance shouldn’t be on those <a href="https://www.i-l-m.com/%7E/media/ILM%20Website/Documents/Information%20for%20media/1.%20Office%20etiquette%20press%20release_Final%20pdf.ashx">who actually use these phrases</a>?</p>
<h2>No ‘I’ in team</h2>
<p>The bigger issue related to annoying office phrases is that we tend to ignore the role they play in human interaction in the office. You might very reasonably ask why someone would use the metaphor “drill down” or “helicopter view” when they could perfectly happily say “explore in greater detail” or “broader view of business”?</p>
<p>But the alternatives I offer, “exploring” and “broader view” are also metaphors – much more conventional and therefore less recognisable than “drill” and “helicopter”, but metaphors nonetheless. This just goes to show that some concepts are so complex and abstract that our only way of capturing them is through metaphors.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/128679/original/image-20160629-15282-134pqze.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/128679/original/image-20160629-15282-134pqze.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/128679/original/image-20160629-15282-134pqze.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=420&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/128679/original/image-20160629-15282-134pqze.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=420&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/128679/original/image-20160629-15282-134pqze.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=420&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/128679/original/image-20160629-15282-134pqze.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=528&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/128679/original/image-20160629-15282-134pqze.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=528&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/128679/original/image-20160629-15282-134pqze.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=528&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The view from above.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/wka/14253132660/in/photolist-nHv2Ly-qjZXhr-nJyrZh-6rHpr8-btVmnZ-uNGAUt-fcrQkE-nW5GQ2-agn3a7-rh3kEu-hUuGP2-rhaEX4-ryBQ48-ryBT9X-HzvJ2W-nBMJCL-rywcbC-nJbrc6-r2xzV8-mCgWgn-mjazdS-nu7tMA-86orfC-eBnf7e-c5g6PE-ei6kso-aGpv6t-c1sR8L-oJjSRj-99z7sS-o28XNz-c5g6KS-eBqpyh-qBC7XC-rRpmAh-c8JQoJ-EKdJim-qErFe3-hUuG1D-8azguy-nKxwCG-ryBUh8-9govhJ-rhaExX-6qdDhD-qGbdsB-aGpvG6-cgX28q-8MxLsi-zE3tzV">Kris Arnold/Flickr</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The second issue is the imagery that the key word in a metaphor evokes (drill/helicopter). By using these particular words, we activate areas in our mind that are linked to drills or helicopters – in these particular cases machines with high power and efficiency. These <a href="http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1207/S15327868MS1703_2#.V3ORg1f53es">metaphorical expressions</a> therefore cannot be adequately replaced by their simplified version: we would lose the intensity and the force communicated by the images they evoke.</p>
<p>But idiomatic expressions do much more than just intensify a message. Research has found that they help to <a href="https://books.google.co.uk/books/about/Language_as_Discourse.html?id=AxAcAQAAIAAJ">express intimacy and closeness</a>, or the opposite – to <a href="http://job.sagepub.com/content/47/4/432">emphasise differences</a>. Idiomatic expressions highlight the common ground between the speakers because they “activate” knowledge that everybody shares. </p>
<p>It is not surprising that <a href="http://www.degruyter.com/view/j/text.2010.30.issue-1/text.2010.002/text.2010.002.xml">researchers have found</a> that internal meetings use far more idiomatic expressions than those conducted with people from outside. Using jargon and group-specific expressions is one of the strongest cohesive forces that can help to strengthen a team.</p>
<h2>Going forward</h2>
<p>Finally, using formulaic expressions makes our life in the office easier. <a href="http://jbt.sagepub.com/content/1/1/27.full.pdf+html">Off-the-peg language comes in handy</a> when we need messages conveyed efficiently, when the main purpose of the communication is to get key information across, or when we have no time or space to rethink formulaic phrases such as “keep me in the loop” or “pick your brains”. Apart from being ready-made, many of these phrases also help us to express our messages in a polite way and show consideration for our colleagues. Would you, for example, react differently to “I need you to come into my office now” instead of “can I pick your brains?” Surely, you would.</p>
<p>When I see articles like the ones cited above, I am always amazed by the dismissiveness and unjustified anger against “office phrases”. We use figurative language all the time. Formulaic phrases make our work easier. Metaphors add a level of expressiveness and intensity. Idioms help us bond. So what is wrong with “corporate speak”? Nothing. I think we should stop being annoyed and instead embrace how varied and expressive our language is. At least, we should run it up the flagpole and see who salutes…</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/61443/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Erika Darics does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Going forward, perhaps we ought to cut office patois some slack – it greases the wheels of business, after all.Erika Darics, Lecturer in Applied Linguistics, Aston UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/527952016-01-29T11:42:26Z2016-01-29T11:42:26ZTranslated: the baffling world of business jargon<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/109238/original/image-20160126-19633-zykosn.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Insufferable or indispensable?</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Sohel Parvez Haque/www.shutterstock.com</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>On your first day in a new job, when you are told by a colleague to prepare for a “blamestorming session” followed by some “blue-sky thinking”, do you rejoice or despair? Once settled in, will you nod sagely or succumb to panic on receipt of a memo from the boss reminding you that “even in a gig economy with the right metrics, marketers can prove the effectiveness of digital in delivering brand lift”? </p>
<p>There are now many varieties of non-standard English competing for our attention, including <a href="https://theconversation.com/dinter-bitz-and-gwop-a-guide-to-british-youth-slang-in-2016-52037">slang</a> and messaging abbreviations, regional dialect, advertising slogans and the “<a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/10288967/My-shameful-secret-Ive-learnt-to-love-cliched-journalese.html">journalese</a>” used in headlines by the tabloid press. But one in particular provokes the wrath of purists, bewilders the innocent and may even disrupt our working lives. </p>
<p>Most often labelled “jargon”, this language category includes the management buzzwords uttered above: <em>blamestorming</em> is a free-for-all discussion which identifies scapegoats; the more familiar <em>blue-sky thinking</em> means going beyond the obvious in the search for solutions. In the boss’s memo, <em>gig economy</em> refers to on-demand providers such as Uber and Airbnb who cater instantly to individual consumers and <em>brand lift</em> is the extent of marketing’s positive outcome. </p>
<p>The coiners of new expressions play with the technical possibilities of English (or offend against all its rules, depending on your perspective). In this world, the noun “incentive” becomes the verb <em>incentivise</em>, which is then abbreviated to <em>incent</em> and risks being turned back into a noun in this new short form. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/XLgvlPMp0o8?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">Buzzword bingo.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The concept of leadership begets the concept of <em>followership</em>, and the receptionist morphs first into a client interface manager, then perhaps a data hub facilitator. Devotees of business-speak select keywords and promote them relentlessly, so that a specialist term becomes a slogan or mantra, and eventually a cliché. Recent examples include <em>disruption</em>, <em>resilience</em>, <em>pivot</em>, <em>scalable</em> and <em>silos</em>.</p>
<h2>Loathe it, love it, or learn to live with it</h2>
<p>During the past decade, <a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3377306/Survey-reveals-10-infuriating-business-phrases.html">surveys</a> by pollsters, HR agencies and academics have canvassed workers’ views and identified the use of jargon as a major irritant. Junior executives and office workers in particular feel intimidated and excluded by superiors’ obscure and pretentious language. They also suspect that this is often employed to conceal incompetence, or disguise unpalatable decisions.</p>
<p>The version of Chinese whispers through which such language spreads can result in embarrassing gaffes. <em>Across the piste</em>, a phrase inspired by skiing, became fashionable not long ago to mean something like “taking the widest perspective” or “affecting a wide range of people”. Through mishearing or misunderstanding, many professionals now say <em>across the piece</em>, while a hapless few are guilty of <em>across the beast</em>.</p>
<p>It is inevitable that technical language will cross over into everyday usage, when it deals with aspects of technology and commerce, for instance <em>big data,</em> the <em>internet of things</em>, <em>crowdfunding</em> and <em>clickbait</em>. This is also the case when language describes changes that are affecting our lives such as <em>negative equity</em>, <em>downturns</em> and <em>downsizing</em>, <em>outsourcing</em> and <em>offshoring</em>, or when it provides a shorthand for fairly complex concepts such as the <a href="https://theconversation.com/karma-may-have-a-role-to-play-in-career-progression-but-it-wont-break-glass-ceilings-33061">glass ceiling</a>, the <a href="https://theconversation.com/uk/topics/precariat">precariat</a> or <a href="https://www.foreignaffairs.com/reviews/capsule-review/2004-05-01/soft-power-means-success-world-politics">soft power</a>.</p>
<p>But the spread of management-speak and the language of the market into other spheres is not something neutral or innocent, as academic linguists working in the field of what’s called <a href="https://pages.gseis.ucla.edu/faculty/kellner/ed270/Luke/SAHA6.html">critical discourse analysis</a> have pointed out. </p>
<p>It carries with it the ideology – the values and assumptions – of market capitalism. In the <a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/9781118611463.wbielsi132/abstract">words</a> of Gerlinde Mautner of Vienna’s Wirtschaft Universität: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>The market is now no longer simply a place of exchange but an overarching social principle. As a result, discourse in a number of previously public domains, including government and education, has become marketised, in other words genres and lexical choices have been influenced by discursive practices from the business domain.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The result is that health authorities, universities and churches, just like corporations, talk of <em>maximising deliverables</em>, <em>empowerment and choice</em>, <em>growth trajectories</em>, <em>customer journeys</em> and <em>adverse headwinds</em>. This tendentious terminology reinforces the power relations between bosses and subordinates, between state and populace and, as with any insider language, those who know how to deploy it can do so to bamboozle or intimidate those who don’t. </p>
<h2>Can we really afford to bin the jargon?</h2>
<p>A crucial test of jargon’s validity is its users’ intentions. If they seek to inform or inspire, we can probably forgive their use of exotic language. But they might risk condemnation. If, for example they use new terms simply to disguise uncomfortable truths: <em>managed separation</em> or <em>transitioning</em> for redundancy, <em>rationalisation</em> and <em>rightsizing</em> for cutting jobs, <em>deficit levy</em> for tax. Or use it to promote questionable ideas: <em>data drill-down</em> for surveillance, <em>subprime</em> instead of worthless. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/109244/original/image-20160126-19667-e2tycx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/109244/original/image-20160126-19667-e2tycx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/109244/original/image-20160126-19667-e2tycx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/109244/original/image-20160126-19667-e2tycx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/109244/original/image-20160126-19667-e2tycx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/109244/original/image-20160126-19667-e2tycx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/109244/original/image-20160126-19667-e2tycx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">No more, please.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">dotshock/www.shutterstock.com</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Condemnation is growing. In 2009, the UK Local Government Association <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7948894.stm">moved</a> to ban the use of jargon among council leaders, and more recently the British prime minister <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/banning-jargon-er-inexecutable-prime-minister-10399125.html">attacked its use</a>.</p>
<p>Help is at hand, since many organisations now publish jargon-buster guides, some <a href="http://www.matthewwoodward.co.uk/jargon-buster/">serious</a>, some <a href="http://www.theofficelife.com/business-jargon-dictionary-B.html">tongue-in-cheek</a> to assist the uninitiated with specialist terminology. If you would like to play at coining new terms yourself there are also <a href="http://projects.wsj.com/buzzwords2014/#p=20%7C41%7C%7C0%7C%7C%7C2">buzzword generators</a> to help you do so.</p>
<p>Much as we may flinch at corporate babble and double-talk, the new vocabulary of business, lifestyle innovation and social change is part of the national conversation. Fluency in it marks you out as in-the-know, at work as a member of an expert community. But too much of it and you risk a cringe-effect. </p>
<p>Try this simple test. When you come across an example of what linguists call, in their jargon, <em>lexical innovation</em>, see if it can be expressed more simply or briefly in everyday English. If so, you can choose to reject it and move on. If not, empower yourself, take ownership of the narrative, get with the program(me) – and do try to keep up.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/52795/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Tony Thorne does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Learn a new language, or stay out of the loop.Tony Thorne, Director of Slang and New Language Archive, Faculty of Arts and Humanities, King's College LondonLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/371652015-02-25T19:31:39Z2015-02-25T19:31:39ZA call to arms: let’s get rid of all the jargon!<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/71282/original/image-20150206-28621-wuexei.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Frequent users of jargon think they're being impressive when they're really just baffling listeners.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Flickr</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>In this high-tech, gee-whiz world, more and more people seem to speak in jargon or, as I like to call it, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gibberish">gibberish</a>. Whether it’s exclusive terms understandable by only a certain few, buzz-words intended to impress in meetings, or euphemisms to make something seem better than it is, the use of jargon really does little more than confuse the listener. </p>
<p>Jargon tends to go through three stages: </p>
<ol>
<li><p>Jargon starts out as a simple technical sublanguage: users devise abbreviations and acronyms that help speed up processes. It also helps reinforce group solidarity in that it becomes a semi-private language, but with clarity its main aim. </p></li>
<li><p>Jargon can go over to the dark side when it is so dense that “outsiders” have difficulty understanding it. Euphemisms and deception may creep into the discourse of the in-crowd’s private language. Organisations may become less transparent, crisis-prone and unable to communicate with external people.</p></li>
<li><p>Jargon becomes an object of ridicule in some quarters, with counter-jargon springing up as a defence mechanism used by the out-group (i.e. the majority). Jargon may prevail, however, as a means of maintaining organisational and social control. </p></li>
</ol>
<h2>Do people understand jargon?</h2>
<p>George Orwell realised that one of the best ways to tackle jargon is via humour: this, for example, is from his 1946 essay <a href="http://www.orwell.ru/library/essays/politics/english/e_polit">Politics and the English Language</a>:</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/72986/original/image-20150224-25689-1aohuyu.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/72986/original/image-20150224-25689-1aohuyu.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/72986/original/image-20150224-25689-1aohuyu.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=183&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/72986/original/image-20150224-25689-1aohuyu.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=183&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/72986/original/image-20150224-25689-1aohuyu.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=183&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/72986/original/image-20150224-25689-1aohuyu.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=230&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/72986/original/image-20150224-25689-1aohuyu.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=230&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/72986/original/image-20150224-25689-1aohuyu.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=230&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="license">Author provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Unfortunately, anti-language like Orwell’s parody is heard in offices and boardrooms every day almost 70 years after he put typewriter to paper. The numbers in the table refer to readability. </p>
<p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Readability_test">Readability scores</a> have been around for almost a century, but they are still a work in progress. Rudolph Flesch developed his <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rudolf_Flesch">Flesch reading ease score</a> in the 1940s. Peter Kincaid modified it for the US Navy in the 1970s to produce what is probably the most widely used readability score, the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flesch%E2%80%93Kincaid_readability_tests">Flesch-Kincaid score</a>. </p>
<p>Flesch’s score could be applied to any text, with texts with perfect clarity scoring 100 and impenetrable gobbledegook scoring zero. Kincaid saw some difficulties with people understanding this, and took some of Flesch’s stats and turned them into school grade levels of understandability, based upon vocabulary awareness tests of students at different levels. </p>
<p>Thus the prophet in the desert scores 78.3 Flesch and 8.4 on Flesch-Kincaid (someone with 8.4 years of post-kindergarten English should be able to understand this). The parody would require 27.1 years of schooling to understand (that’s several PhDs beyond year 12).</p>
<h2>Jargon in every day use</h2>
<p>How often do we hear jargon like this parody? Try this one from <a href="http://pmtranscripts.dpmc.gov.au/preview.php?did=15838">former Australian prime minister Kevin Rudd</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>What you saw even prior to the end of the Cold War here, of course, was the evolution of a series of confidence and security-building measures coming off the back of CSCE, OSCE and the Helsinki accords. There has to be a greater synergy between, let’s call it our policy leadership in this, which has been focused so much, legitimately, on targets and global architecture, almost reverse-engineered back to the means by which you can quickly deliver outcomes, and on the demand side in our economy we’re looking at potential advances in terms of 20 to 25% range if you do this across the board. It all takes cost, but let me tell you it’s probably the quickest lever you can pull given the challenges we face.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Using the same readability checker, Rudd scores 15.9 on Flesch-Kincaid readability. Given that <a href="http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Lookup/by%20Subject/1301.0%7E2012%7EMain%20Features%7EThe%20National%20Year%20of%20Reading:%20libraries%20helping%20to%20make%20Australia%20a%20nation%20of%20readers%7E206">46% of Australians aged 15 and over</a> have a skill level for prose literacy less than what is seen as required to meet the demands of everyday life, most of the people who elected this prime minister would not have a clue what he was talking about.</p>
<p>Some jargon is invented to cover up an <a href="http://www.amazon.com/New-Doublespeak-Anyones-Saying-Anymore/dp/0060928395/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1423015974&sr=8-3&keywords=william+lutz">unpleasant truth</a>, like getting the sack (coerced transition, decruitment, work force imbalance correction) or making your job sound more prestigious. Take these jargonistic euphemisms:</p>
<ul>
<li>Automotive internists (car mechanics)</li>
<li>Vertical transportation corps (elevator operators)</li>
<li>Initiate a career enhancement program (lay off workers)</li>
<li>Negative patient care outcome (the patient died)</li>
<li>Rapid oxidation (fire in a nuclear power plant)</li>
<li>Pre-emptive counter attack (home forces attacked first)</li>
<li>Engaged the enemy on all sides (troops were ambushed)</li>
<li>Backloading of augmentation personnel (retreat by troops)</li>
<li>Pre-dawn vertical insertion (invasion) </li>
</ul>
<h2>How to avoid jargon</h2>
<p>Orwell realised that word choice was often the source of jargon, or anti-plain English:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Bad writers, and especially scientific, political, and sociological writers, are nearly always haunted by the notion that Latin or Greek words are grander than Saxon ones, and unnecessary words like expedite, ameliorate, predict, extraneous, deracinated, clandestine, subaqueous, and hundreds of others constantly gain ground from their Anglo-Saxon numbers.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>We in the Anglosphere are fortunate in having had England invaded by French soldiers and Latin scholars, because it has <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Cambridge-Encyclopedia-English-Language/dp/0521530334/ref=sr_1_14?ie=UTF8&qid=1423016459&sr=8-14&keywords=david+crystal">dramatically enhanced our vocabulary</a> (English has about one million words, while French and German only have about 200-300,000). So how do we stop falling prey to, or becoming perpetrators of, jargon?</p>
<p>• Install a readability checker on your word processor and use it to see how your text is going (bearing in mind that they are rough-and-ready figures)</p>
<p>• Use shorter words where longer words can be replaced</p>
<p>• Use shorter sentences</p>
<p>• Remember your audience: will they be able to understand your communication? </p>
<p>• If you must use complex words or acronyms, provide a glossary </p>
<p>• Stay in Phase One of jargon development - don’t let insecurity, contempt for others or a need for control get in the way of good communication </p>
<p>• Use humour to ridicule jargon junkies: look at <a href="http://www.dack.com/web/bullshit.html">Dack’s Bullshit Generator </a> - a table that allows you to combine verb, adjective and noun to form completely meaningless jargon like “facilitating holistic mindshare”!</p>
<p>• Learn and practise <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plain_English">Plain English</a>.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/37165/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Baden Eunson does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Frequent users of jargon think they’re being impressive when they’re really just baffling their listeners.Baden Eunson, Adjunct Lecturer, School of Languages, Literatures, Cultures and Linguistics , Monash UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.