By Jay Lund

The circles of jargon hell move from “lazy and less effective communication of ideas” to a general audience, to a narrower already-expert audience, to a substitute for substantive communication, to intentionally harmful and pretentious obfuscation, all of which disrupt the reader’s comprehension and eventually destroy all interest in communication.

  1. Lazy jargon – occasional unexplained specialized terms for a more general audience
  2. Acronyms – a less thoughtful use of jargon, communicates ineffectively for a general audience
  3. Technical jargon – The use of jargon intelligible only to those already expert
  4. Buzzword oblivion – the use of vague jargon as an annoying substitute for substantive thought.  For California water management, ChatGPT suggests, “Our integrated, stakeholder-driven water management strategy leverages adaptive frameworks and scalable, nature-based solutions to optimize multi-benefit outcomes, ensuring climate resilience and equitable resource allocation across the hydrological nexus.”  Sound familiar?
  5. Obfuscating jargon – the strategic deployment of verbose and unnecessary words designed to convolute the otherwise non-elusive meaning of the subject thereby ensuring clarity is entirely circumvented (i.e., use of jargon to obscure or distract the reader from a subject)
  6. Pretentious jargon – use of jargon to create insecurity in the reader and sometimes security for the author
  7. Acronyms of acronyms – usually integrates all the above disfunctions

Jay Lund is a Professor Emeritus at the University of California – Davis. Dr. Christine Parisek at the UC Davis Center for Watershed Sciences, with a recent PhD, suggested the fine example of obfuscatory jargon.

Figure from XKCD (https://xkcd.com/2326/).

Tags


Sharing


Discover more from California WaterBlog

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.


Discover more from California WaterBlog

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading