Plain fonts easier to read 24 November, 2008

Researchers at the University of Michigan have found, unsurprisingly perhaps, that the more difficult instructions are to read, the more challenging the task seems

Researchers worked with 20 students who were each given the same instructions for an exercise routine printed in two different fonts. One was in Arial, an easy to read sans-serif font, and the other in Brush, a script font.

They were asked to estimate how long the routine would take, and were given a seven-point scale to rate the following: how quick it would feel, if it would flow naturally, drag on and feel boring, and how likely they were to incorporate it into their daily routine.

The findings, which were published in the October issue of the journal Psychological Science, revealed that participants viewed the exercise, when provided in the Arial font, as feeling quicker and easier to include in their daily routine.  As for time, they thought the exercise in Arial would take 8 minutes, but in the Brush font, 15.

Identical instructions were also given for making sushi to 27 men and women, in both easy and difficult-to-read fonts. They perceived the recipe in the plainer font would take less time to make and were more inclined to prepare it than the same recipe in the other font.

So, there we have it.  Instructions should be written in plain English — and in a plain font, too.

Bona fide Plain English the status quo 4 November, 2008

Declaring war on “elitist” and “discriminatory” bureaucratic language, the councillors in Bournemouth, England, has ordered borough workers to replace Latin phrases in official documents and correspondence with plain, everyday phrases.

The British press is outraged that the Bournemouth Borough Council (Latin motto: Pulchritudo et Salubritas — beauty and health) singles out 19 Latin words or phrases (such as bona fide, status quo, ad hoc, vice versa) and suggests alternative wording.

“Not everyone knows Latin,” the council told its staff. “Many readers do not have English as their first language so using Latin can be particularly difficult.”

The councils of Salisbury and Fife also have directed their teams not to use certain Latinate phrases.

Dismayed scholars say the Bournemouth ban dilutes the world’s richest language. One denounced it in very plain, colorful English.

“This is absolute bonkers and the linguistic equivalent of ethnic cleansing,” said Mary Beard, a professor of Classics at the University of Cambridge. “English is and always has been a language full of foreign words. It has never been an ethnically pure language.”

The Daily Mail offers a plea for common sense: “Si fractum non sit, noli id reficere (If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it!)”

I disagree with the Daily Mail.  People often only use these words to make themselves feel important.  And, particularly in a business context, if people don’t understand your meaning, it takes time (and costs money) to decode your language.

So, which phrases are to be avoided and substituted?

• ad hoc — for this special purpose, improvised
• ad lib, ad libitum — impromptu, shortened, to fill up time
• bona fide — in good faith, genuine
• e.g. (exempli gratia) — for example, such as
• etc. (et cetera) — and so on
• i.e. (id est) — that is
• inter alia — among other things, as well as
• NB (nota bene) — please note, this is important
• per — each, a
• per se — for itself, by itself, as such
• prima facie — at first sight
• pro rata — in proportion
• pro tem — for the time being
• quid pro quo — equivalent, give or take
• status quo — existing condition, state of things
• vice versa — the other way round
• via — by way of, through
• viz (videlicet) — that is to say, namely
• vis-a-vis — in relation to

Busting the jargon 18 September, 2008

For everyone who’s tired of management jargon, the Australian Institute of Management has developed this fantastic little program (free) called Bullfighter that appears as an icon in Microsoft Word and PowerPoint and works much like a spell check feature. When it detects jargon and complicated language it dispenses a tongue in cheek reprimand to the author and suggests an alternative word or phrases.