Development Jargon and Language Development

The language of development is contributing to the development of language. Photo by Pexels.
The language of development is contributing to the development of language. Photo by Pexels.

By Leo Magno

Development jargon is becoming mainstream, reflecting the evolution of language as well as cultural and social norms.

Write plainly enough for a 12-year-old to understand.

That was my editor’s instruction when I started newswriting. Easier said than done. I have a 14-year-old, and communications remain tricky despite having lived with him since birth. Imagine newswriting for a whole audience with an average age of 12.

At ADB, my team communicates through publications for development professionals. Our style guide gives us similar advice: write clearly, be brief, use the active voice, avoid jargon. Yet as we edit ADB publications, we sometimes fall into jargon-laden devspeak' or 'aidspeak.'

Jargon is increasingly becoming part of the English lexicon, and among the more than 20,000 new words added to the Merriam-Webster dictionary since 2005 are many words formerly considered as jargon. Language develops over time, and as it is used. A decade ago, my newspaper publisher told me to use 'car theft' instead of 'carnap' (from 'kidnap'), arguing that the latter is not found in any dictionary. Last year, the Oxford dictionary, although not Merriam-Webster, accepted 'carnap.'

When I began development work coming from the private media sector, my journalist’s brain associated different meanings to words like 'stakeholder,' 'beneficiary,' and yes – even the word 'development' itself:

  • Whereas before 'development' meant to me simply the act or process of developing, in devspeak it means improving the quality of people’s lives.
  • I used to think of a 'stakeholder' as one who has invested money in something; in devspeak it refers to all actors who stand to gain or lose from involvement in a project.
  • 'Third World' countries are 'developing' countries.
  • 'Impact' is not a forceful strike, but rather a development project’s long-term effect on society.
  • An 'indicator” refers to specific measurements of quality of life, instead of a general statistical unit.
  • 'Participation' is no longer joining an activity, but processes where parties become actively involved in planning and decision-making.

Gender neutrality in development language also introduced new words to my everyday work. Whereas 'chair” used to refer to a piece of furniture, now it replaces 'chairman.' The same applies to 'fisher' and 'fisherman.' Gender-specific honorific titles like 'Mr.' and 'Ms.' are not to be used. Oxford suggests using 'Mx' as the gender-neutral replacement to both, although our style guide tells us not to use such titles at all.

Lest I be mistaken for someone who promotes jargon, I proclaim that I dislike it but also recognize its benefits.

Having a unique development lexicon has its advantages. It shows a strong culture surrounding professionals in this area, and a meeting of minds among development bodies. It becomes a unifying factor, a rallying point for us to speak the same language and know instinctively what we mean when we say 'sustainability' or 'beneficiary.' In contrast, if an automotive professional, a computer specialist, and a zoologist talk about 'ram,' the first would think the discussion is about trucks, the second would say memory, and the third would discuss sheep.

While speaking the same jargon may be useful on the professional level, communicating to a general audience, though, is different. If we produce a publication targeted at development professionals and policy-makers, jargon is acceptable. But if we are addressing people who make it possible for us to be paid by other people (Aidspeak Dictionary’s definition of 'beneficiaries'), perhaps we could drop the jargon and—as my former editor once told me—write plainly.

Resources aside, two distinct publications can be produced—one technical, another nontechnical—with different language depending on the audience. If you wish to see how much jargon your publication contains, run it through the development jargon detector.’ A manual check may give you different results.

ADB’s style guide is based on the Chicago Manual of Style, a living document that is updated – and rightly so, because language develops over time. If you go back 500 years ago, there would be hundreds of English words you wouldn't understand, and discover that "tea" was pronounced as "tay" and "gone" was pronounced as "goan." Go back 1,000 years in the past and you would not understand English at all. Watch this video to find out.

Like the language of technology, politics and entertainment, the language of development is contributing to the development of language. Development jargon is becoming mainstream; grammatical rules are being broken, then rebuilt. This reflects the evolution not just of language, but also of cultural and social norms. This is how the development sector and the culture of social work contribute to language development.

While jargon is not ideal, I do believe language should be freed, not confined in a cell and placed in a straitjacket.