Good morning all,
time to throw my hat into the ring. For many years I have had argument about
communication problems between academe/professionals/bureaucrats and us mere
mortals with or without disabilities in the community.
As Larry pointed out, specialist jargon tends to exclude, and promotes
factionalism. More serious is that it tries to rationalize everything, even
those things that can not be rationally defined. This is a form of Taylorism
(remember Frederick Winslow Taylor and his Scientific Management Principles)
where the easily measured by check list, numbers, rules and procedures are
the only matters considered, and the abstract values that shape our
philosophies, culture, beliefs and quality of life are either ignored or
buried in incomprehensible bureauspeak. Erthics, culture and morality can
not be rationally defined. They depend on abstract values and judgement.
People in the real world communicate at an emotional level, which is as
precise as the gobbledygook we are fed by specialiats, academics, social
workers and all the others who watch us being cold and wet in the rain
through double glazed windows from the comfort of their ivory towers.
Get real, and try and move into the real world and try and communicate with
real people, the way they do where words have a deeper meaning than their
dictionary definitions.
rgds John
----- Original Message -----
From: Patsy Wakefield <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Friday, July 27, 2001 9:59 AM
Subject: Re: Producing simultaneous interpretation in simpler language
> Hi Janet
>
> A couple of ideas I had are:-
>
> 1. Acceptance of a conference paper could be made conditional on a
> "readability" score, most word processors have the ability to give a
> readability score.
> 2. Including people with development disabilities on the committee
that
> approves the papers
> 3. The Call for papers could include a blurb on simple language and
the need
> for this to be used in presentations as well as in written papers.
>
> I think it would do a lot of academics good to have to come down from
> academic writing, to write in plainer, simpler English.
>
> It is possible to do language translations simultaneously, so the
technology
> is there. A voiced translation, would probably be better than a projected
> translation.
>
> I have to admit, that a conference we held a few years ago, never though
of
> thought of simpler language needs. We all tend to concentrate on sign
> interpreters, other media types etc.
>
> Thanks for publicising this issue.
>
> Patsy
>
> Patsy Wakefield
> Masters Student
> Information Science Dept
> School of Business
> University of Otago
> Dunedin
> NEW ZEALAND
>
> ________________End of message______________________
>
> Archives and tools for the Disability-Research Discussion List
> are now located at:
>
> www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/disability-research.html
>
> You can JOIN or LEAVE the list from this web page.
>
________________End of message______________________
Archives and tools for the Disability-Research Discussion List
are now located at:
www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/disability-research.html
You can JOIN or LEAVE the list from this web page.
|