Recommendations
Avoid using these words as they can create confusion:
- agenda (unless it’s for a meeting)
- advancing
- collaborate (use working with)
- combating
- commit/pledge (we need to be more specific - we’re either doing something or we’re not)
- countering
- deliver (pizzas, post and services are delivered - not abstract concepts like improvements or priorities)
- deploy (unless it’s military or software)
- dialogue (we speak to people)
- disincentivise (and incentivise)
- empower
- facilitate (instead, say something specific about how you’re helping)
- focusing
- foster (unless it’s children)
- impact (do not use this as a synonym for have an effect on, or influence)
- initiate
- key (unless it unlocks something. A subject/thing is not key – it’s probably important)
- land (as a verb only use if you’re talking about aircraft)
- leverage (unless in the financial sense)
- liaise
- overarching
- progress (as a verb – what are you actually doing?)
- promote (unless you’re talking about an ad campaign or some other marketing promotion)
- robust
- slimming down (processes do not diet)
- streamline
- strengthening (unless it’s strengthening bridges or other structures)
- tackling (unless it’s rugby, football or some other sport)
- transforming (what are you actually doing to change it?)
- utilise (use "use")
Avoid using metaphors – they do not say what you actually mean and lead to slower comprehension of your content. For example:
- drive (you can only drive vehicles, not schemes or people)
- drive out (unless it’s cattle)
- going forward (it’s unlikely we are giving travel directions)
- in order to (superfluous - do not use it)
- ring fencing
With all of these words you can generally replace them by breaking the term into what you’re actually doing. Be open and specific.
Usability evidence
The specific recommendations on this page come from:
GOV.UK Style guide A to Z, UK Government website
Plain English and words to avoid, UK Government website
Supporting evidence around avoiding jargon and indirect language:
'Jargon in Technical Writing', J. H. Dawson, ARS, Prosser, WA 99350, Weed Technology, 1989, Volumne 3:540 2008
'The Basic Spelling Vocabulary List', Steve Graham, Karen R. Harris, Connie Loynachan, Reading Rockets, 2013
'ASD Simplified Technical English', Simplified Technical English, ASD-STE100, 2017
List of plain English words and phrases, Wikipedia, last updated 2018
Tools worth exploring:
I have removed:
Totally agree around ‘deliver’ but interested in alternative synonyms that people opt for, especially as this seems to have become pretty ingrained in stakeholders’ heads over the years.
Do some of these words depend on the context?
Here's a few that get on my nerves:
'Impact' is the bane of my life. Some people within my department have started using 'impact' to mean 'assess and make a change'. I work closely with an 'impacting team' who will 'impact' (consider the effects of) the recent policy change or operational decision and then 'impact' it (make changes as a result of that assessment). I keep sending them synonyms, but it keeps creeping back.
Some words I was always taught to avoid in news writing (but appear in the news far too often still):
Hunt - as in, 'hunting a suspect', unless it's with a bow and arrow.
Incident - too vague, just say what happened
Unveil - 'unveiled a policy' etc, ugh!
Launched - unless it's a ship
These are all great. Want to just add them to the list?
Thing we don't have is evidence… :D
Whether you choose the 10,000, or 5,000 most-frequently-used corpus, staying within i will keep the jargon out of your writing.
Also see: List of plain English words and phrases
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_plain_English_words_and_phrases
'Align' kills me.
Check out this piece on technical writing and jargon in Weed Science: http://wssa.net/wp-content/uploads/Jargon-in-Technical-Writing.pdf
It touches on the definition of jargon, and basic common sense of what's "unintelligible or meaningless".
One thing that stood out to me is this: "Every term in the standard useful jargon of [Weed Science] was once an "uncommon and unfamiliar word." —> This is an interesting point to keep in mind when thinking about the context and the different industries we're working in.
Then, the piece then ends in this cuteness:
"Remember:
Unclear, uncommon, obscure, and vague,
Are words one should avoid;
Words that are concise and clear,
Should always be employed."
I mentioned this to SR on Twitter, but will add it here too. The aerospace industry has strict standards about the use of not only terminology, but also words that can be ambiguous. It is an internationally recognised standard and is pretty strict, followed in certain industries (often transport and military-related). It contains a load of terms that should be avoided and suggestions for less ambiguous alternatives. The data behind the standard isn't available, but the reason for a lot of it was safety/litigation/translation, so it is useful.
[http://www.asd-ste100.org/]
"Remember:
Unclear, uncommon, obscure, and vague,
Are words one should avoid;
Words that are concise and clear,
Should always be employed."
That's true. But you have to understand what terms the audience regard as concise and clear. I've written for some pretty jargon-heavy industries, and in some situations, using terms that are clearer to people outside the industry only confuse those who are in it. You really need to know your audience and the language they use.