"Most experts would agree that clear writing should have an average sentence length of 15 to 20 words."
This quote is so preposterous it almost made me want to stop reading the article. Different types of writing should have different sentence lengths. I'm quite sure the sentence length for a math textbook and a Clorox ad should be different. There's a reason it's not common practice to measure one's average sentence lengths.
Like most material written on language, this article says almost nothing and is basically filler. "Don't be afraid to give instructions". "Use lists where appropriate". Well of course we know we can give instructions! I recently read a famous book called "How to Read a Book" that in a similar vein struggled to find anything non-obvious to say about language. It just comes so naturally to people that it's difficult to comment on. This article is coming from an organization called the Plain English Campaign that's been around since 1979. I wonder what they can have claimed to have accomplished since then.
This article reminded me of arguments I always read in philosophy about tough subjects like radical skepticism where the authors fail to make any points beyond the obvious. Sure, certain knowledge is impossible for humans to attain, but can you say anything else!?
The page has many useful tips on how to avoid writing in a bureaucratic, distant, formal, long-winded style.
I see lots of text daily that fit the antipatterns mentioned in the article. Sometimes the writer doesn't know better. Sometimes they internalized some prescriptive hard and fast rules that are supposedly mandatory for pro writing (no split infinitive! No sentence started wit "so"!).
But more often, I think, obscure and pretentious writing is a feature for the writer. It creates distance, formality, passive aggressively signals "leave me alone" and "you are a small cog in a powerful machine", "we have authority over you", it allows for better plausible deniability, and CYA.
Or said in a different way from the writers point of view: if I wrote this too plainly, more people will feel compelled to write to me as if I was their buddy and will guide them through everything. By writing formally, I put up a wall and make my life easier. People will actually have to take time to decipher it all, so its also a natural filter for attentive readers.
Respectfully, I strongly disagree. If we assume that your intent is to convey meaning in an accessible way, you should be precise. Expansion on concepts should be clearly separated. There is rarely a communicative need to conflate more than two concepts in a single sentence. That said, if your intent is artistic expression, then a different mode makes sense.
In order to communicate effectively you need a mental model of your audience. The same sentence can be cumbersome to some readers, just right for others, and even condescendingly simplistic for a small minority.
The fact that you found the article to be useful simply means that you are part of their target audience, which is great. Just keep in mind that the same advice will not work as well when you communicate with a different audience
My context with using english in general (like here on HN) is communicating as a non-native with both native speakers and non-native speakers. For some of those, just reading english is a challenge.
Since I also know I can easily write nonsensical sentences, I thought this article was a good reminder on how to safely stay in the "I make sense" area in this context, and as so disagreed with person I replied to ^^
I would definitely have higher ambitions regarding "tone" in my mother tongue though, but for english writing, I'll be happy if I can be clear !
This quote is so preposterous it almost made me want to stop reading the article. Different types of writing should have different sentence lengths. I'm quite sure the sentence length for a math textbook and a Clorox ad should be different. There's a reason it's not common practice to measure one's average sentence lengths.
Like most material written on language, this article says almost nothing and is basically filler. "Don't be afraid to give instructions". "Use lists where appropriate". Well of course we know we can give instructions! I recently read a famous book called "How to Read a Book" that in a similar vein struggled to find anything non-obvious to say about language. It just comes so naturally to people that it's difficult to comment on. This article is coming from an organization called the Plain English Campaign that's been around since 1979. I wonder what they can have claimed to have accomplished since then.
This article reminded me of arguments I always read in philosophy about tough subjects like radical skepticism where the authors fail to make any points beyond the obvious. Sure, certain knowledge is impossible for humans to attain, but can you say anything else!?