Plain English in ten little words
|
Towards more picturesque speech™
|
- May — Avoid redundancy. The parties may, but are not obliged to. “Nothing in the foregoing will prevent parties from —”. Don’t confer entitlements that the parties had in any case. Don’t say a thing more than is necessary. Don’t overcommunicate. Less is more.
- By — passive tense. Write in the active, with energy, and in a way that clearly assigns and accepts responsibility
- Of — nominalisation, adjectivisation
- Shall — fusty old language. Herewith, hereof, deemed
- And/or — You are a professional writer: write like one. Be confident. Avoid nervous laungage, not doubt. Unless otherwise agreed; write to avoid doubt in the first place.
- verb — complicated sentence constructions (because the simple verb (give, do, be, make, have) is usually accompanied by a noun that could itself have been a verb
- Including — parentheticals that by definition do not add anything. Without limation
- Leverage — jargon that is designed to make the writer look wise, and not the reader enlightened.
- Judge — For whom are you writing? Not posterity, not a judge, not to cover your backside,
- Deemed — avoid legal tics. Things that, yes, you might be able to justify on tendentious logical or ontological grounds, but which don’t make a damn of difference in the real world. So it might be true that the redemption amount is “an amount equal to the final price” — yes, it is true the redemption amount isn’t, from a brutalised ontological perspective, the final price; in a conceptual scheme they are different things, but they're identical, and you lose nothing, except a few dead scales of pendatic skin, by saying the “redemption amount is the final price”. Likewise “this shall be deemed to be that” what, practically is the difference between “being deemed to be something”, or (worse) “being deemed to be an amount equal to something” and just “being something”?