From: Translation Bureau
Language Navigator allows you to search by keyword or by theme to quickly find answers to questions about language or writing in English and French. To learn more about this search engine, consult the section entitled About Language Navigator.
New to Language Navigator? Learn how to search for content in Language Navigator.
Search by keyword
Search fields
Search by theme
Search by theme to quickly access all of the Portal’s language resources related to a specific theme.
About Language Navigator
Language Navigator simultaneously searches all of the writing tools, quizzes and blog posts on the Language Portal of Canada. It gives you access to everything you need to write well in English and French: articles on language difficulties, linguistic recommendations, conjugation tables, translation suggestions and much more.
To translate a term or to find answers to terminology questions in a specialized field, please consult TERMIUM Plus®.
Results 11 to 20 of 321 (page 2 of 33)
Readability formulas, programs and tools: Do they work for plain language?
An English blog post about research on readability formulas, programs and tools and whether they work for plain language.You want to make your documents easy to understand. You want people to follow instructions, make decisions or send information to you. So you want to use plain language. You’ve possibly been told about reading levels or grade levels. And you’ve probably been encouraged to use a readability formula (such as the one in Word) to get your text down to a certain grade level. Sometimes running a document through a readability tool is all people do to flag plain language issues. Plain language experts say these tools are actually not useful. And they could even undermine all the other proven techniques you can use. Wait! What? Is this new? The idea that readability formulas are problematic goes back a long way. As early as the 1980s, people were researching it and talking about it. “By the mid-1980s, there was a widespread sense that plain-language advocates had shifted priorities from readability to usability.” “Research tells us that most readability formulas are outdated methods for assessing text quality.” – Dr. Karen Schriver Readability formulas are ineffective and counterproductive Dr. Schriver described some research on this from Richard Kern, which was published in 1980 (so experts have known about this for a long time). Kern’s research highlighted important problems with readability scores: (1) Readability formulas cannot match material to readers at targeted grade levels. (2) Rewriting to lower the reading-grade level score does not increase comprehension. (3) Requiring that text be written to satisfy a targeted reading-grade level focuses attention on meeting the score requirement rather than on organizing the material to meet the reader’s information needs. Dr. Schriver also described how people learn to write simply to get a better score. But this does not increase reader comprehension. Readability formulas don’t measure the right things “Most of what makes a document usable is not included in readability formulas.” – Dr. Ginny Redish Dr. Redish describes why the formulas don’t measure the right things. They were not created for technical documents. They assume that short words are always the better words. They don’t work with many documented features of plain language. Let’s look at the last two in that list because they are easy to follow. Readability formulas assume that short words are always the better words Plain language requires you to write for your audience’s needs. So what qualifies as plain writing depends on who the audience is. The goal is to pick words that are familiar to the reader, not to use short words all the time. Sometimes short words are harder to understand because they are abstract (ennui, writ) or carry a lot of historical meaning (fez, nadir). But a formula will score them as easy words. “The grade level score from a readability formula is based on the average length of the words and sentences. Though the formulas vary, they generally assume that longer words are harder words and longer sentences are harder sentences. They can’t tell you whether the words you are using are familiar to your readers or whether the sentences you have written are clear and cohesive.” – Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, US Department of Health and Human Services Readability formulas don’t work with many documented features of plain language Bulleted lists are known to be very helpful to readers (if used to properly chunk information), but readability formulas score such text as harder to read. “Readability formulas assume that you are writing prose paragraphs. They count sentence length by going from period to period. If you use bulleted lists to chunk your material and lay your text out with white space, readability formulas will say you have long sentences. Yet, usability studies have consistently shown the value of lists and white space as aids to locating and understanding information.” – Dr. Redish You can see a demonstration of this point with an example in one of Dr. Redish’s publications. Dr. Redish also notes these critical techniques that readability formulas do not measure: determining the right content for readers organizing the material for readers using meaningful headings and other tools to guide readers In her paper (written with Caroline Jarrett), she explains why improving readability scores doesn’t usually correlate with improving comprehension. In fact, she gives a specific example where the version with a readability score that indicated it was easier to understand was actually less understandable to the people who needed to read the document. The ISO plain language standard excludes such formulas An international working group made up of experts from 25 countries wrote the ISO plain language standard (published in June 2023). Between them, these experts speak 19 languages and work in a wide range of roles and organizations. Many of these experts have been doing research on plain language for decades. This group of experts all agreed with this wording in the standard: “Plain language ensures readers can find what they need, understand it, and use it. Thus, plain language focuses on how successfully readers can use the document rather than on mechanical measures such as readability formulas.” And there is no mention of readability formulas in the standard besides that explicit exclusion of them. What’s in the standard? “Plain language” is defined as follows in the standard: Communication in which wording, structure and design are so clear that intended readers can easily find what they need, understand what they find, and use that information. The four principles in the standard give details on what methods can be used to write a plain language document: Readers get what they need (relevant) Readers can easily find what they need (findable) Readers can easily understand what they find (understandable) Readers can easily use the information (usable) Where does this leave us on using readability formulas for plain language? We can see then that since the early 1980s researchers have agreed that readability formulas focus only on a very small part of what makes a communication plain. It’s also clear that the international experts who worked on the ISO standard for plain language decided not to support using readability formulas for assessing the clarity of texts for audiences around the world. You should reconsider your use of the formulas and instead evaluate text quality by testing your communications with intended readers. View sources Note that Dr. Redish and Dr. Schriver endorse this summary of their research (personal communication to Gael Spivak). And Dr. Schriver contributed the closing paragraph. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, United States Department of Health and Human Services. “Tip 6. Use Caution With Readability Formulas for Quality Reports.” ISO standard 24495-1 Plain language — Part 1: Governing principles and guidelines, quoted with permission from Committee Manager: Mr. Changqing Zhou of ISO Technical Committee 37: Language and terminology. Jarrett, Caroline, and Ginny Redish. “Readability Formulas: 7 Reasons to Avoid Them and What to Do Instead.” UXmatters, July 29, 2019. Redish, Ginny. “Readability formulas have even more limitations than Klare discusses.” (PDF) ACM Journal of Computer Documentation 24(3), August 2000, 132–137. Schriver, Karen. "Evaluating Text Quality: The Continuum from Text-Focused to Reader-Focused Methods." (PDF) IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication 32(4), (1989): 238–55. Schriver, Karen. “Readability Formulas in the New Millennium: What’s the Use?” (PDF) ACM Journal of Computer Documentation, 24(3), August 2000, 138–140. Schriver, Karen. “Plain Language in the US Gains Momentum: 1940 – 2015.” (PDF) IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 60(4), 2017, 343–383.Source: Our Languages blog (posts from our contributors)
Number of views: 8,224
active voice, passive voice, voice
Sentences written in active voice are usually clearer and more effective than sentences written in passive voice. However, that doesn’t mean we should always avoid passive voice. Active vs. passive voice In active voice, the subject is the doer of the action expressed in the verb: Maneesha ate the apple. [Maneesha did the eating.] The theatre company will perform a Shakespearean play next week. [The company will do the performing.] In passive voice, the subject is the receiver of the action expressed in the verb: The apple was eaten by Maneesha. [The apple didn’t do the eating; it received the action.] A Shakespearean play will be performed next week. [The play won’t do the performing; it will receive the action.] In these last two examples, the action is done by a person (or group of people) and carried over onto the apple and the play. Thus, the subjects “apple” and “play” are the receivers of the action. In these sentences, the doer of the action is either named in a phrase after the verb (“by Maneesha”) or is left unnamed. Advantages of active voice Active voice is more concise: an active voice sentence is always shorter than the same sentence in passive voice. Active voice is clearer and more direct, because it puts the doer of the action first and follows a logical order: DOER of action + ACTION + RECEIVER of action (if any) And of course, active voice is active—so it makes our writing more dynamic and energetic. For these reasons, it is usually better to write in active voice—and to rewrite any passive voice sentences to make them active. Uses of passive voice Although active voice is usually better, passive voice makes good sense in the following situations: when the doer of the action is unknown The lights were left on. [You don’t know who left them on.] when the doer of the action is less important than the receiver The package was delivered this morning. [It doesn’t matter who brought it.] when you want to avoid naming the doer of the action I was given the wrong directions. [You don’t want to lay blame.] Inclusive writing The last use of the passive listed above (as a way to avoid naming the doer of an action) can be a useful technique to make your writing gender-inclusive. When the person doing an action is represented by a gendered pronoun (“he,” “she,” and “he or she,” or any of their forms), you can often eliminate the pronoun by making your sentence passive: Active, gendered sentence Passive, inclusive sentence If a member cannot attend the meeting, he or she must submit a vote by proxy. A vote must be submitted by proxy if a member cannot attend the meeting. Each employee must pick up his or her identification badge in person. Identification badges must be picked up by each employee in person.Source: Writing Tips Plus (English language problems and rules)
Number of views: 7,409
flu, flue, influenza
The short form flu for influenza has become standard, with no apostrophe (’flu) needed. The word flu is not capitalized when preceded by an uppercase adjective, as in Hong Kong flu. When you have the flu, it is in everyone’s best interest for you to stay at home and rest. The Singapore flu was especially hard on the very young and the very old. A flue is a duct, channel, tube or pipe. There was a bluebird stuck in the flue of the wood stove.Source: Writing Tips Plus (English language problems and rules)
Number of views: 7,284
at that point in time, at this point in time
To write plainly and concisely, use then instead of at that point in time. Other possibilities to replace at that point in time include at that time and at that point. Wordy: It was at that point in time the firefighters realized they could not save the building. Concise: It was then (or at that point) the firefighters realized they could not save the building. To write plainly and concisely, use now instead of at this point in time. Other possible replacements for at this point in time include at once, immediately, right away, right now, straightaway and today. Wordy: The director cannot make that decision at this point in time. Concise: The director cannot make that decision now.Source: Writing Tips Plus (English language problems and rules)
Number of views: 6,634
in the amount of, in the sum of
To write plainly and concisely, use for or of instead of the roundabout phrases in the amount of or in the sum of. Mr. Smith gave me a cheque for (not in the amount of) $35,000. The applicants asked the court to award costs of (not in the sum of) $10,000Source: Writing Tips Plus (English language problems and rules)
Number of views: 6,405
Plainly said
A quiz on plain language vocabularyHave you ever read a text and wondered "Why doesn't the writer just say what they mean?" That’s where plain language comes in! When you want to communicate a specific message to your audience, it’s important to use clear, simple language.See if you can pick out a simpler word to use in the sentences below.Need a few tips before getting started? Check out our Writing Tips Plus article “clear communication: use clear words and expressions.”1. In Canada, it’s customary to tip your server when dining out.importantunconventionalusual2. The company will terminate his contract.downsizeendlay off3. It’s important to economize now for a future down payment on a house.paysavespend4. The editor found an egregious error in the manuscript.glaringsmalloutstanding5. Five countries will accede to the proposal.agree toappoint todisagree with6. The CRTC will increase its operating budget to cover the aforementioned expenses.aboveincludedattached7. Arlene chided Ernie for taking a long time to finish his homework.praisedscoldedcomforted8. They were able to consolidate the information from the files.spread outseparateput together9. Tom subsequently held a number of positions in the federal government.beforelatercurrently10. The office is using online courses to facilitate employee training. help withdelaysave onSource: Quizzes on the Language Portal of Canada
Number of views: 6,306
eligible, illegible
The near-homonyms eligible and illegible are adjectives. Eligible means “fit” or “qualified.” You will not be eligible for promotion until you have worked here for two years. Illegible signifies “unreadable.” It is often said that doctors have illegible handwriting.Source: Writing Tips Plus (English language problems and rules)
Number of views: 6,245
old, older, elder
Elder and eldest are normally reserved for people. Use elder when comparing two people and eldest when comparing three or more. Lianna always admired her elder brother. The eldest person attending the reunion will receive a plaque. The title elder is often used for senior or highly respected members of a family or community. Having survived years of hardship, the elders were said to be very wise. As a title, Elder is often capitalized. Although barely middle–aged, Jacob was elected to the Board of Elders of his church. Sixteenth–century painters Lucas Cranach the Elder and Lucas Cranach the Younger were father and son. Old, older and oldest refer to either people or things. Use older when comparing two people or things and oldest when comparing three or more. Lianna always admired her older brother. The oldest person attending the reunion will receive a plaque. Houses in Halifax are older than those in Calgary. In the oldest office buildings, there are very few telephone connections.Source: Writing Tips Plus (English language problems and rules)
Number of views: 6,073
healthful, healthy
Healthful refers to something that gives or promotes good health Eating a healthful diet is one way to stay healthy. Healthy means having or showing good health. However, healthy is being used increasingly in both senses, even in official or academic documents. Healthy seniors contribute their skills and experience to society. With the harvest from his vegetable garden, Marcel eats a healthy diet. Healthy villages, healthy schools, healthy workplaces, and healthy food markets are objectives of the Healthy Cities movement all over the world.Source: Writing Tips Plus (English language problems and rules)
Number of views: 5,862
Weed your words: Remove redundancies
A quiz on weeding out redundancies.We are often told to write the way we speak. But sometimes when we speak, we use more words than we need. While we can get away with redundant and long-winded expressions in speech, we should be careful to avoid this fault in writing. See if you can weed out the unnecessary words in the sentences below.1. Marisol had to write her essay all over again after her hard drive crashed.overall overno words are redundant2. The mayor and city councillors reached a general consensus of opinion on waste disposal.generalgeneral, of opinionof opinion3. Sidney is the fastest skater of the three Canadian skaters.skaterCanadian skatersno words are redundant4. Use a soft measuring tape to measure around your waist.softsoft, aroundaround5. Rosalie always wakes up at 2 a.m. in the morning.in the morninga.m. in the morningno words are redundant6. There are nine students who signed up for the advanced workshop.whothere arethere are, who7. Manny was both extremely tired and very hungry.bothboth, veryextremely, verySource: Quizzes on the Language Portal of Canada
Number of views: 5,583