This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »
How can we simplify legal/business language?
What would it take for governments and businesses to adopt plain language in their communications with citizens and consumers? What's happening now, in your country or community, that could also work for others?
This Live Conversation will open at 2.30 pm EST on January 26th, 2012.
EDIT: Because of overwhelming enthusiastic responses, this conversation open for few more days. Sandra will be checking your comments from time to time and follow up with them. Thank you for participating!
Bettina Fackelmann
The students in our survey were rather skeptical if the (German) political and the media system could be changed - so thank you for the idea just to boycott those who don't use an understandable language. It's tough in regards to the state, but at least citizens could get the idea "It's not my fault that I don not understand. It's their fault, they do not express understandably." And claim to get better letters etc. Just had a look at your site and decided to join the Forum.
Ksenia Thompson
1) many mothers during the first few years of their children's life compaling about "going brain dead".. One of many reasons for that - a young child doesn't warrant a complex verbal communication. During studying we are forced to deliver volume of work - 5,000 words or more etc. We are NOT praised if the subject could be covered by fewer statements, but penalised! Therefore often unnecessary bubbles are created..At work we are constantly forced to deliver volume of communication - once again, how can you charge for document of 1 page the same that you could (would) charge for the same concept of 50 pages... To stretch is out - that's where the "new" words are necessary -... Once you learn all those new words - can you actually go back efficiently? Can you concise effectively? Can it actually be done without feeling like a mother to a newborn - "usuing only some of her potential? etc? 2. Should we than strive to do it all - simple and complex or should interpretors become involved? Just like help is being used to make up presentations to use MORE words - maybe there should be a service that allows for less words to be used? The concept is already in place - in marketing, advertising etc... Labels that can't carry loads of info conceised to make sense... 3) why do we treat consumers(clients) as incapable to understand the language we use in business/legal every day. Isn't it somewhat patronizing to think that they need so much simplification? Legal advice here requires us to put matters in plain English - and I never had one client complain - is it because I am originally Russian and speak 2 other languages fluently that I pick up on general ignorance? Thanks
George Kong 30+
This is not dissimilar to having commenting and documentation in programming - one states the design intent and the rationale used to achieve it, while the other provides the actual code by which the mechanics of the action are carried out.
We use both, because some code can be very opaque; especially when you start getting functions that call functions that call other functions, ad nauseum.
Sandra Martins 500+
About 200 summaries were published to mixed reviews. Regular folk loved them, legal folk tended to hate them. Main criticism: the government had no right to "interpret" the law, that was the lawyers' and the courts' job.
I'm not legally trained - my part in this project was to write the summaries, which would then have to be approved by the government - so I couldn't argue with some of the more conceptual views. But I think that resistance is always to be expected when you try something new and, particularly, when you start messing with certain groups' power.
If you'd like to see some of the summaries, visit this Facebook page: http://www.facebook.com/leiclara?ref=ts
George Kong 30+
But you're right - those entrenched in power, that rely on certain ineffective details to retain that power are motivated to fight against progress in order to retain their own standing and positions in society. The human mind is so averse to personal loss after all.
Richard Lucas 100+
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simplified_English
I'm in a business associated with helping companies cut their translation budgets by getting the source language sorted out: for example
http://ste.argostranslations.com/ste-consulting/
In the long run if it saves money I guess it will spread, but its only recently that this has started to matter as globalization means more and more organisations have to think about
not just their own language but the rest of the world too.
Paul Danon
Sandra Martins 500+
Currently, we seem to be moving towards a definition that is more outcome-focused than method-focused. This means that a text/document/website/etc. is considered to be in plain language when the intended audience can easily read it, understand it and use it.
The guidelines you mention are useful but do not, per se, guarantee this result. And, as you say, we need more research on the effectiveness of such guidelines.
Paul Danon
Pablo Van Klinken
In the Eu, there are guidelines for language use. Most people in the Eu, don't speak the language of other membercountries. So if you write a text in B1, about 90% of the people will understand the text. In Holland there are experiments with rewriting text in B1.
James Harris
this is not an argument against, but merely a clause to add to the plain language dynamic. there should be some type of mechanism whereby lawyers cannot simply continue to ask for simpler language and stall the court or hammer at the intelligence of their opponent. i would suggest going to a jury.
Salim Solaiman 50+
Well law or government will not do that , because that's the "Abraca Debra" for them to confuse people and rule.........
Sandra Martins 500+
The problem arises after the deal is done, when the business suddenly changes the way it communicates with its customers - obscure terms and conditions, messy bills, etc.
It's like a lovely boyfriend turning into a lausy husband once he hears that "I do".
Salim Solaiman 50+
Should not all communication at least have a goal , which is communicating rightly what was intended to?
I am not clear what you are trying to say by saying "problem arises after deal is done"
If you wanted to say about communication related to buy-out, bankruptcy, merger etc of business, then actually they need to do communication in legal terms so it turns in to one as you described. Look here the target audience is different not the day to day consumer but it's the regulators, share holders, competitors, investors, bankers etc etc..... its a communication of lawyers...thats why it follows the usual rules their style.
Sandra Martins 500+
Rebecca Cohoe
I'm not the project lead, but I've forwarded both of your addresses.
We'd love to chat further about the project and what both of you are doing in relation to the challenge of making research understandable. It's a pretty major priority at our university because we serve a mainly rural population. "Our special obligation to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador" is actually part of our mandate, so I think that has helped us get administration on-board for these sorts of projects.
Anyhow, we'll definitely be in touch on this.
L Taylor
Peter Everett
christov manuhutu
Sandra Martins 500+
William Palaia
Sandra Martins 500+
Even in countries where literacy levels are fairly high, like Sweden, plain language is still important -- a high-literacy reader (let's say, a doctor) is as baffled by a rental contract, a letter from Inland Revenue or a piece of legislation as anyone else.
Ricardo Moura
Já agora, vi por alto o site http://portuguesclaro.pt, que me parece que seja teu, e parece-me muito interessante e pertinente. Sou designer de comunicação e curiosamente uma das minhas lutas tem sido a clareza da comunicação através do "menos design possível". Tal como é importante retirar palavras, também é importante tirar grafismos supérfluos no design gráfico e no design de produto.
Felicidades e obrigado por este forum muito interessante e construtivo. Parabéns.
Armando Teixeira
no meu ponto de vista , existe em Portugal dois grandes problemas para se poder simplificar a linguagem:
1º a educação é feita de demasiada teoria e preparada de modo a criar diferença de classes em que o médico é o ser Doutor, o contabilista é Técnico oficial de contas e o professor é o mestre , a clivagem de posto ( profissão) é acentuada através de jargões e rétóricas para podermos parecer mais importantes doque os comuns mortais que são trolhas , emp. de balcão etc.
2º o objetivo das instituições , sejam privadas ou publicas , em complicar as mensagens parece-me a mim claro, confundir os 80% dos Portugueses para assim como não conseguem perceber os contratos , não cumprem , como não cumprem falham , logo quem beneficia são as instituições. então para quê simplificar ? com isso só fariam que os 80% compreendessem e assim ficariam mais atentos e não seriam levados em erros e falhas logo as instituições lucrariam menos . isto parece-me mais grave quando o exemplo começa no Governo e entidades publicas e acaba nos sindicatos
obrigado
Gary Goebel
Plaintiff states...
Which ones is quicker, easier and makes sense to non law trained people? My guess is the first is tradition, habit or done without thought because that is the way it has always been done. Not exactly compelling reasons to continue, are they?
Eduard Worst
Waseem Soomro
For instance, in my home country in South Asia. They use complex form of the languages, but it's mandatory for them to do that at times. So only law can simplify it.
Sandra Martins 500+
Peter Everett
David Acevedo
I remember the first time I read an overseas contract. A lawyer had to translate it for me. I wondered why the arcane writing and not just plain text. He told me the plain text was "ambiguous" but the legal term where obfuscated.
When contracts require a lawyer to interpret them, a lawyer has to be hired and there is a profound monetary benefit to the whole lawyer community to maintain that as a specialized field with it's own impenetrable language.
BTW the "plain text law" is that ever enforced?
EDIT: I wrote a blog about using programming as an alternative language for writing laws. http://rabbitmoondot.blogspot.com/2011/07/programmatic-law.html
Sandra Martins 500+
Eduard Worst
Sandra Martins 500+
Ksenia Thompson
Sandra Martins 500+
If your doctor explains your diagnosis and your treatment options in plain language, you'll be in a better position to make a decision. You don't need to know all the complex chemical and physiological processes involved in each one of them. And you're unlikely to take the matter in your own hands and perform surgery on yourself or mix up chemicals to make your own pills.
Eduard Worst
Mr X
You could for example say "-Sour" say the fox. But you do not really mean that foxes actually run around i the forest barking the word "sour". Instead you implicitly mean that some things just happen to be unattainable and for this very reason you say to yourself, that you really do not care since it is most likely not worth striving to get there. And even if you did, it would just be bad anyways."
Sentence 1. Sour
Sentence 2. Sour as in some things just happen to be unattainable and for this very reason you say to yourself, that you really do not care since it is most likely not worth striving to get there. And even if you did, it would just be bad anyways."
A legal argument works the same way, but the difference is that a legal argument is surrounded by a lot more implicit meanings to each word and or combination of words that may or may not be the same. It is virtually impossible to add all principles, analogies, exceptions etc such that a certain rule will be emptied and have everything about it covered. In essence, they are impossible to print out.
A second reason why it will not be possible is that the more text you add, the less general a certain statement or rule become, in the end you will have added so many things into it that you need make a second and third and ...rule to cover other situations not covered by the first. If you do not you will have a loophole in the law where all the bad sharks can swim through.
Sandra Martins 500+
In legal texts most technical terms only account for around 3% of the document. So, even if we don't change those, we can still improve 97% of it.
Frank Luo
There are also those who intentionally do not want to be understood. You raised the mortgage crisis as an example. But as we see at this point, "predatory lending" was specifically based upon the people's inability to understand the mortgage contract.
I applaud what you're doing but the forces that resist the effort are many and strong. I wish you the best of luck. I do think that efforts that focus on specific areas are a good way to start though -- justice system, then consumer finance like credit cards and mortgages, voting rights, etc. -- one at a time.
Kevin Greene
Eduard Worst
James Fisher
Tiffany Kahnen
To aid in this process, attorneys must remember that there is a difference between legalese and business. They must bridge that gap with common sense.
John Niman
Some legal writing is confusing because of an over dependency on formalism and a desire to 'sound like a lawyer.' I'm currently in law school, and our writing instructors try to edit out this sort of writing. In general, at least at my school, there's a push to simplify legal writing when possible.
Sometimes, however, simplification just isn't possible because lawyers need to be accurate. That sort of complexity is just a result of trying to explain complex transactions, and is likely to get more, rather than less, confusing if the lawyer tries to simplify the language. Well said, Tiffany.