'In the beginning
was the Word ... and it was
''
by sonya hammond
Webster initially defines 'language' rather tersely as 'human speech', but, in case we need clarification [and some of us apparently do], he goes on to expand rather lengthily, concluding with what might be taken as an admonition that language is 'the particular form or manner of selecting and combining words characteristic of a person, group, or profession'.
Since some governmental groups have apparently taken the latter definition as a quid pro quo to create criminal incomprehensibility, it is gratifying that Vice-President Gore has taken on the monumental, if probably impossible, task of attempting to restore some semblance of clarity to what ... outside of government circles ... is rarely understood as the English language.
By announcing that the federal government was going to start using 'plain language' in its communications, the VP in essence may have instigated the most massive rewrite since Nixon attempted to exculpate himself from Watergate.
The results, if achieved, could mean that we might actually
understand such previous mystifications as instructions on tax and 
Medicare
forms, or get through the full text of legislation
proposed on our voter's pamphlets before falling into terminal comas. In
order to accomplish this, hundreds of thousands of pages of regulations already on the
books will have to be cleaned up, and writers of new forms and documents will presumably
be required to enroll in 4th Grade English ... let's face it, these people were
not sitting in the first row during grammar class.
The most basic questions would seem to address exactly what 'plain language' is, and, if anyone in the government still knows, who will lay down the new guidelines for those thoroughly addicted to rewriting it into incomprehensibility? Assignments have yet to be made, but we must hope that William F. Buckley will not be among the chosen.
One example of the sort of problem involved was perpetrated by the Occupational Safety & Health Administration which found it necessary to use 63 words to define its standard of 'egress' [one assumes from their clutches.] In part, they ordained that
'Ways of exit access and the doors to exits to which they lead shall be so designed and arranged as to be clearly recognizable as such.'
After enduring what must have been the sort of pain usually associated with root canals, some clever writer cut this to
'An exit door must be free of signs or decorations that obscure its visibility.'
Gore is reported to have quipped that, 'Don't put up anything that makes it harder to see the exit door' might have sufficed.
Paul Light, an expert on government reform, says that "There are roughly 100,000 people in Washington whose job it is to complexify [shame on Mr. Light] plain language." The suffering public would not doubt that for a minute, and any relief the VP manages to inspire will be welcome.
But it is unfortunate that his reach does not extend to the United Nations, which, although its operating idiom is ostensibly English, apparently writes all of its documents in 'Unese' which we must hope never qualifies as an official language. Use of this abomination may well explain why, in spite of persistent UN cease-fire declarations, everyone usually keeps right on shooting. It's entirely possible that neither side understands that they have been told to desist.
It does not seem too much of a reach to assume that our government's language spinmeisters may not react enthusiastically to the suggestion of cleaning up their act. Reducing inscrutable legalisms and verbosity to 'plain language' might open any clearly recognizable door to public understanding of exactly what is being said, proposed, or demanded of them.
Acquiescence in the face of the incomprehensible could cease; lethargy induced by incoherence could turn to rebellion; clarity could lead to questions of motive. None of this will do.
Sadly, we should not hold our collective breath waiting for Gore's suggestion of brevity to be taken. If 'brevity is the soul of wit', federal agencies, whose wit has never been noticeable, are unlikely ever to achieve it.
©sonya hammond, 1998