Joe Kimble of Thomas Cooley Law School in Lansing, Mich., debunks several myths associated with stuffy attitudes by people who criticize the use of plain language. Kimble said the myths are carried on by some professionals for any number of reasons.

Some fear the openness that plain language creates for understanding and dealing with issues. They prefer a safety net that cloudy language seems to give them. Others think, falsely, that use of difficult language gives an aura of prestige to things. Some just don’t want to upset the apple cart.

One thing such people all have in common, Kimble says, is that they don’t understand how important plain language is in order to be able to truly communicate with people. Kimble wrote an in-depth article, “Writing for Dollars, Writing to Please,” that appeared in the Scribes Journal of Legal Writing (Vol. 7, 1996-1997). In it, he debunked five myths and misconceptions about plain language. The following excerpts are from the article.

“First, plain language does not mean baby talk or dumbing down the language. It means clear and effective communication – the opposite of legalese – and it has a long literary tradition.

“Second, plain language and precision are complementary goals, not antagonists. If anything, plain language is more precise than traditional legal writing because it uncovers the ambiguities and errors that traditional style, with all its excesses, tends to hide. So plain language is not only the great clarifier – it improves accuracy as well.

“Third, plain language is not subverted by the need to use technical terms or terms of art. Real terms of art are a tiny part of any legal document.

“Fourth, plain language is not just about vocabulary. It involves all the techniques for clear communication – planning … organizing … clear sentences … plain words … and testing the document … on typical readers.

“Finally, contrary to what some critics have said, there’s a pile o hard evidence showing that plain language is more understandable to readers than the traditional style of official and legal writing.”

Joe Kimble takes on the stuffiness of some people who criticize the use of plain language. The law school writer from Lansing, Mich., says they don’t understand how important it is to communicate clearly with people.

In an article for the Scribes Journal of Legal Writing, Kimble debunked five myths about plain language. The following excerpts come from “Writing for Dollars, Writing to Please.”

“First, plain language does not mean baby talk or dumbing down the language. It means clear and effective communication – the opposite of legalese – and it has a long literary tradition.

“Second, plain language and precision are complementary goals, not antagonists. If anything, plain language is more precise than traditional legal writing …with all its excesses. So plain language is not only the great clarifier – it improves accuracy as well.

“Third, plain language is not subverted by the need to use technical terms or terms of art. Real terms of art are a tiny part of any legal document.

“Fourth, plain language is not just about vocabulary. It involves all the techniques for clear communication – organizing … clear sentences … plain words … and testing … on typical readers.

“Finally, contrary to what some critics have said, there’s a pile of hard evidence showing that plain language is more understandable to readers than the traditional style of official and legal writing.”

Joe Kimble takes plain language critics head-on. The Lansing, Mich. writer says some people are just too stuffy. They don’t understand how important it is to communicate clearly with others.

In an article for the Scribes Journal of Legal Writing, Kimble debunked five myths about plain language. The following excerpts come from “Writing for Dollars, Writing to Please.”

“First, plain language does not mean baby talk or dumbing down the language. It means clear and effective communication – the opposite of legalese – and it has a long literary tradition.

“Second, plain language and precision are complementary goals, not antagonists. If anything, plain language is more precise than traditional legal writing …with all its excesses. So plain language is not only the great clarifier – it improves accuracy as well.

“Third, plain language is not subverted by the need to use technical terms or terms of art. Real terms of art are a tiny part of any legal document.

“Fourth, plain language is not just about vocabulary. It involves all the techniques for clear communication – organizing … clear sentences … plain words … and testing … on typical readers.

“Finally, contrary to what some critics have said, there’s a pile of hard evidence showing that plain language is more understandable to readers than the traditional style of official and legal writing.”