2. The Wrong Words

2. The Wrong Words

Jargon cannot be better defined than in the words of H.W. Fowler:
Jargon is talk that is considered both ugly-sounding and hard to understand;
applied especially to the sectional vocabulary of a science, art, class, sect, trade
or profession, full of technical terms…the use of long words, circumlocution and
other clumsiness.
There are two kinds of language identified here. First, the special terminology that
develops within any group: lawyers, social workers, computer staff, medics, pilots, and

so on. The use of these technical vocabularies can be both irritating and incomprehensible
to outsiders, but within the group they act as a kind of spoken shorthand, a concise and
precise way of expressing a concept (i.e., siblings, software, hardware, etc.)
In a world of increasing specialization and technology, these technical vocabularies are
not only defensible, they are necessary. Mathematicians, lawyers, systems analysts and
accountants need the precision and brevity of their own „languages.‟
What is indefensible, however, is to use your special vocabulary on outsiders who are not
familiar with your jargon. Not only will you fail to communicate, you will bore or
antagonize your „receivers.‟
The second variety of jargon, defined by Fowler as the use of long words, circumlocution
and other clumsiness, is a sure way of losing, or at least obscuring meaning in a fog of
words. There is nothing intrinsically wrong with using long words (circumlocution is
certainly one, but shorter than „longwinded and roundabout ways of saying things‟!).
However, too many long words do make it difficult to understand what we are reading or
hearing (see the description of the Fog Index below).
The letter of which the following is an extract won a booby prize of two pounds of tripe
from the Plain English Awards Committee:
We would advise that our policy does exclude as contingency consequent upon a
condition which is receiving or awaiting treatment at the date of issue of the
policy.
The same letter ended ironically:
We hope this clarifies the situation.

The following excerpt from a real letter illustrates clumsiness of expression:
In response to your card regarding the above order and the non-delivery of one
box of 352 Typing Paper, we are writing to inform you that this has currently met
an out of stock situation and that delivery cannot be met until the end of
February.
Cliches are those expressions which, due to their original popularity, have been overused,
and have lost their force and vigor as a consequence. Harold Macmillan‟s expression, a
wind of change, which originally referred to a new direction in African politics, but is
now applied to any minor event, is an example. Other clichés, often with a less
respectable history, may commit the offence of circumlocution too: at this moment in
time and in this day and age for now are particularly irritating.
Slang, like clichés, changes with fashion. How many slang words for money can you
recall? Readies, lolly, dough, bread, cabbage. Good English is what is appropriate to the
circumstances, and slang has its place in familiar chat. It is out of place in most business
communication: it is obvious that too informal a choice of language in, say, a company
report would not inspire confidence.

Pompous people seek to add weight (at the expense of losing the point) by using long
words, and too many words, for example:
Passengers are requested not to communicate with the driver while the vehicle is
in motion.
Pompous writers habitually use such expressions as in connection with when about might
be more appropriate. They ameliorate, acquaint, terminate and assist when they could
improve, tell, end, and help!
Churchill used the simplest, most direct, language in his plea for brevity:
To do our work we all have to read a mass of papers. Nearly all of them are far
too long. This wastes time, while energy has to be spent in looking for essential
points.
Negative expressions often cause an emotive response from the recipients, and need to be
used with care, i.e.:
I am afraid he is not available.
This is a rejecting statement whose rejection is emphasized by the word „afraid.‟ It is
better to say „I am sorry, he‟s not available,‟ which at least implies a polite degree of
sympathy.
Disappointment is a particularly negative word and a sentence beginning with „I am sorry
to disappoint you…‟ may be more upsetting to the receiver than if the word had been
omitted.

Unfortunately is another depressing expression: „Unfortunately we were not able to get in
touch‟ makes a negative statement even more negative.
It is often preferable to avoid negatives altogether. „We cannot deliver in three weeks‟ is
totally negative and may lose you a customer. Put another way, „Can you give us five
weeks for delivery?‟, it invites the receiver‟s cooperation.
Ambiguity is a particularly offensive fault in business writing, when content is often
factual. Smith told Jones he had been promoted is an example of ambiguity caused by a
careless use of pronouns. Other kinds of ambiguity may have a second meaning which is
contradictory, i.e.:
Nothing acts faster than…(a well-known headache pill) 