[Sussex] Do we confuse you?

[John D.]

On Sat, 2005-04-09 at 12:06 +0100, Steve Dobson wrote:
-----%<-----
> 
> Could you please define what it is you mean by "plain english".  By
> using the common noun word "english" rather than the proper noun
> word "English" you must be referring to the American term for, what we
> here in England call, "spin".  I thought that a "plain" shoot in Snooker
> was one where no "spin" was applied to the cue ball when struck with 
> the cue.

No, an incorrect assumption

> Okay, I am being deliberately obtuse here (don't flame me please) to
> make a point.  At the risk of putting words into John's mouth he is
> asking for us to reduce the vocabulary that we use to communicate so
> that more people can understand and follow what is discussed.  While
> this sounds reasonable, be careful for what you ask - you just might get
> it.
> 
> I reject the accusation that jargon is used to exclude the general
> public from a specialisation or profession.  This list is a good
> example of why I reject it, because anyone asking "what do you mean
> by?" will normally get a full explanation, sometimes overly full.
> 
> So, if we are not trying to exclude, why do we use jargon?  I think
> the answer is clear: to be precise.  At least that why I do it, and 
> I expect the other "experts" on this list do to.  Within the context
> that the jargon is used it has a very narrow meaning, and what would
> otherwise take a sentence, maybe even a paragraph, can be expressed
> using a word or two.
> 
> So when John asks for "plain [E]nglish" that says to me that John
> wishes me to "dumb down" my English because he is too lazy to:
> 
>   1). Look the word up in a dictionary.  You might be surprised
>       how many jargon words are in a good, upto date dictionary.
> 
>   2). If you can't find the word in a dictionary then google for it.
>       "google" can be found on page 746 of the Oxford Dictionary of
>       English" (second edition) published in 2003.
> 
>   3). Ask.  If I don't reply it is because someone else has beaten
>       me to it.
> 
> I don't like this current trend of "dumbing down".  I think it 
> degrades all concerned.  I know John, so I know that he won't mind
> me picking on him[1] as I rant on about a tread in society that I
> don't like.  I believe it is better to educate people up, to assume
> that everyone is capable of more than they currently are.  It is 
> more respectful for a start, and for a second it doesn't require that
> we ask the question of how low should we set the bar.
> 
> So I will close with this thought.  If you ask a question of me on
> this list I will give you the answer, if I can, at no cost, but it
> isn't for free.  I expect you to pay my price, and my price is to
> learn my language.  If you don't want to pay that price then you
> are free not to, but at the same time I am free not to talk to you
> either.  So if you want "plain English" you may get it not because
> experts "dumb down" there talk, but because they stop talking to 
> you.
/-----%<-----

Steve, 

I originally had a reply that would probably have gone to several
printed pages, but was feeling lazy :-P so these two links pretty much
spell it out!

http://www.plainenglish.co.uk/
and
http://www.wordcentre.co.uk/page8.htm


If you really need an example of what I'd consider "dumbing down", then
this http://brain.cx/DNS-HOWTO/index.html is a fine example (though I
did find it rather amusing).

regards

John D.

p.s. Oh, and while I remember to ask, what's the date of the next "fair"
that "we're"(?) due to be at, so that I can check my roster to see if I
can make it.