Scientific jargon, good and bad

35Citations
Citations of this article
68Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Scientific and technical jargon - specialized vocabulary, usually Latinate - plays a vital role in scientific and technical communication. But its proper use continues to be a point of discussion because of our concern with audience adaptation, rhetorical exigence, rhetorical purpose, and ethics. We've focused on teaching students - and on convincing scientists, engineers, and other writers/speakers - to gear their specialized language to the recipients of their communication, to the occasion calling for their communication, to what they wish to accomplish through their communication, and to the ethical goals of safety, helpfulness, empowerment, and truth. These are exactly the sorts of things we should be doing. My contribution to this conversation is a reinforcement and, I hope, an extension of the argument that we should also be teaching and convincing students and professionals: 1) to fully appreciate what makes jargon either good or bad; 2) to carefully distinguish jargon usage from other aspects of scientific and technical style; and 3) to recognize that in every context, even in communication among experts, jargon should be used judiciously - that is, in the most helpful, least taxing way.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Hirst, R. (2003). Scientific jargon, good and bad. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 33(3), 201–229. https://doi.org/10.2190/J8JJ-4YD0-4R00-G5N0

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free