Levels of technicality in scientific communication

The large number of specialized languages which have resulted from the rapid development of modern science and technology, although meant to facilitate communication within each area of specialization, may create barriers to understanding between different levels of competence and specialization. Ways have to be found for identifying and describing the fundamental features of technical and scientific writing and for clarifying its differences from what is called “common” language. In this paper, the style of scientific writing has been discussed from the point of view of its lexical, semantic, and use characteristics. On the assumption that the level of technicality of a scientific publication is responding to the degree of training and specialization of its readership, a comparison was made between the language of a group of articles taken from the Scientific American and the language of articles given as references by them. Distribution and overlap of vocabulary in the two groups of articles were analyzed. Some differences between the writings in two areas of science were found. How can we identify a “technical” or “scientific” language, as distinct from “ordinary” language, that is. from the language that is commonly used to deal with the basic aspects of everyday life? Can we describe distinctive features that will enable us to recognize a fragment of written text as belonging to one rather than to the other type of language? Better still, can we formulate rules for content analysis so precise that a computer can be instructed to assign a text to the correct category? The problem of specifying and explaining technical languages is in some way equivalent to the problem of translation. Technical languages are analogous to foreign languages: they are used by particular groups of people, who share some common activity or interest; their elements, although different in form, are equivalent in meaning and can be translated from one into the other language; and they can be learned with appropriate training and practice. But perhaps it is more appropriate to compare the technical language to a dialect, that is, a language-variety spoken by a subgroup in the larger language community of people using a common language[l]. As in the case of dialects, some technical languages may be only slightly different from the ordinary language, and therefore be intelligible outside the group of habitual users, while others are so different as to sound like foreign languages. Different levels of technicality are found not only in spoken languages but also-and even more-in written text. A “highly technical” text can usually be recognized at first sight as different from a text written on the same subject for a lay audience or for an audience less proficient in the use of the particular specialized language. Languages exhibiting a very high degree of technicality are sometimes labeled “jargons”[2]. The term, when used by outsiders, has a pejorative connotation, implying not only that the language in question presents difficulty of understanding to the noninitiated, but also that it is somewhat ugly-sounding and clumsy. In addition, the technicality of jargons is often suspected of being misused, or of being unnecessary and misleading. When the label “jargon” is used by insiders, however, its connotation seems to be positive. In this case the term makes an appeal to the sense of camaraderie, the understanding and the bond of common interests of the group. The problems of communicating across different languages are today important for their implications which have extended from interpersonal communication to man-machine communication. Language can be an obstacle to effective communication even among people who speak the same language; it certainly is when the parties attempting to communicate speak different sublanguages. Doctor-patient and lawyer-client communication are examples of verbal exchanges in which no understanding occurs unless the technical language of the person trained in the particular discipline is translated into the common language of the untrained[3]. Modern societies, with their increasing emphasis on consumerism and accountability to the public from