Plain language exposes empty phrases

What originally motivated you to get involved with easy-to-read language and later with plain language?

My work with adults with learning difficulties who have little access to reading and writing. That was 30 years ago – before the internet. There was no easy-to-read content suitable for adults for their vocational training. So we created the necessary learning materials on the computer: pictograms and easy-to-read texts.

You worked for one of the pioneers of easy-to-read language in Luxembourg for 20 years. How did your understanding of linguistic accessibility develop during this time?

In the context of self-determination for people with disabilities, more and more topics needed to be explained in simple terms, including topics relating to independent everyday life and personal rights. The European rules on easy-to-read language gave further impetus to progress.

A lot of awareness-raising had to be done, and there was still a lot of resistance... However, the acceptance of texts in easy-to-read language has improved significantly in the meantime.

What ultimately prompted you to take the step into self-employment as an expert in plain language?

Some websites look nice at first glance, but have complicated content. The texts are not always written in a ‘user-friendly’ way, but in the technical jargon of the company or administration. I therefore wanted to offer a complete package, closely aligned with the practical needs of companies, including consulting, support and simplification of content.

How do you differentiate between easy-to-read language and plain language – technically, but also in practical application?

First of all: what do they have in common? Both are very clear languages, both simplify content for adult users. Structure and design are important: key information should be easy to find.

Easy-to-read language simplifies content much more, so that even users with very little reading and learning experience can understand it better. The design is immediately noticeable: the font is larger and the sentences have around eight words. There are hardly any subordinate clauses. The paragraphs are kept very short. A new sentence begins on a new line. The words are common terms from everyday life. There are lots of explanations, examples and pictures. It is also important to work with the target group, ‘people with learning difficulties’.

Plain language has a larger vocabulary and longer sentences, but without using technical language. Here, too, special technical terms are explained, often with examples.

Plain language stays close to everyday language. A term such as ‘documents’ would not need to be explained in plain language, but it would in easy-to-read language.

Some texts lie between ‘easy-to-read and plain’, which is then called ‘easy language plus’ or ‘very plain language’.

Plain and easy-to-read language can complement each other. Some people absolutely need easy-to-read language, I would like to emphasise that here. So there is no single solution for everyone. Sometimes, however, the path from technical language to easy-to-read language is not directly feasible. Or the target audience for easy-to-read language may need a different medium: for example, a written summary of the topic, with contact addresses where more information can be obtained, and an explanatory video. In this case, it helps if the complex content is already available in plain language.

I am pleased that two years ago, international recommendations on plain language were collected and published in DIN/ISO 24495-1. In the meantime, there is another section on legal plain language.

Professional experience and challenges

Today, you work with very complex topics, such as banking. How do you approach such content when you need to make it accessible?

First, I consult with the company that wants to simplify its content: How is the team structured? Is there any previous experience with easy-to-read or plain language, with accessibility? Who is the target audience? How and where will these users access the content later? etc. It is important that my contacts learn the principles of plain language. This can be done during a short introduction.

When reviewing existing company texts, it is often a matter of changing the structure, adding subheadings, and writing precise explanations for technical terms so that a layperson (like me) can understand them. I develop this together with the company, which has the technical expertise on the subject. Especially when it comes to legal topics, constant consultation is important. The simplified text must always remain correct. Every team member should be able to understand the necessary ‘adjustments’ to the source text and confirm that they are valid.

What kind of reactions do you typically get from experts when you ‘simplify’ texts from their field of work?

I like to work with a practical example from the company, which I then ‘simply’ edit. This helps when plain language is difficult to imagine for complex topics. Most of the time, the reactions are positive, because everyone wants it to be understandable for the target audience. But it's difficult to implement this yourself when you work with technical jargon on a daily basis.

Was there a project that was particularly challenging or surprising for you – perhaps because the specialist area was particularly ‘protected’ or conservative?

It's difficult when a company or, for example, a political party uses vague terms. Then you have to work out exactly what is meant. Sometimes it then becomes clear internally that there are still contradictions and that we actually need to discuss it again. Sometimes it is difficult to find good examples without steering or narrowing the focus on the topic...

You worked with us on the glossary and guide for plain language in the banking sector. What was particularly important to you in this collaboration?

The guide should remain short and practical for employees. It does not contain all the details. The glossary is a good aid for explaining important technical terms in more detail. It was also important to consider which terms are used in spoken language, for example in Luxembourgish. What I like about the glossary is that the examples show different people in different everyday contexts.

Impact, acceptance and prospects

What feedback do you receive from the actual target groups of accessible texts?

Many people appreciate it when information is kept clear and simple. It saves time and stress. Depending on the situation, it can even be a matter of safety, for example, being able to understand instructions correctly. It's also about one's own rights: I want to be properly informed and then decide whether I want something or not.

To what extent do you observe that organisations are beginning to consider linguistic accessibility as part of their overall accessibility – not just as an add-on, but strategically?

Hard to say. Certainly in the social sector. Increasingly in administration. I see good approaches.

Unfortunately, the time and budget required for linguistic accessibility is not systematically planned for from the outset.

And not holistically: because it is not enough to simplify the content, it must also be clearly visible on the website. And it must be accessible to users with various disabilities.

Are there any typical misunderstandings or prejudices about plain language that you encounter regularly?

More with easy-to-read language, but even there, less so now. Some fear a linguistic impoverishment. Then I say: the point is that the information reaches people. Easy-to-read language is an additional service. And there are other ways to maintain language skills.

With plain language, these arguments are hardly present, as it does not look any different and the spelling is not changed either. It doesn't have to be an additional option; it can replace clunky administrative language. This is difficult in legal matters, where it is often used as an explanatory supplement. But a website should at least be in plain language if it is aimed at a wider audience.

How do you see the future of linguistic accessibility – in Luxembourg, but also internationally? What do you think are the next important steps?

At the moment, there is a lot of talk about new technologies. They can be a useful tool for revising complex texts. However, it is important to remember that AI will be another ‘person’ in the team, not a quick, cost-effective way to produce a super-great, plain text with a single click. Behind it, there still needs to be a person who is familiar with the needs of the users. It is to be welcomed that Luxembourg is developing its own AI, which will at least support the administrative areas in preparing customer-friendly, simplified information.

Another development is digital alternatives to the ‘old’ print media. You can have texts read aloud to you, access audiovisual material, or send a voice message to a friend.

Apps can transcribe voice messages and, depending on the situation, translate them into another language. This brings new opportunities but also challenges for professionals.

What would you personally like to see from institutions that communicate with citizens – whether in the social, educational or financial sector?

Take the first step more quickly. Start with a small pilot project that can be a good ‘door opener’ for plain or easy-to-read language.

A company can achieve a lot with simple means. Sometimes all that's missing is an outside perspective... and a little support.

What advice would you give to young professionals who are interested in accessible communication?

Go for it, guys! There are entire degree programmes on ‘accessible communication’ or media and communication... And with the rapid pace of development, it can never get boring 😊