Imagine you’ve just won a wonderful two-week trip to a foreign land. You don’t speak the language. You’ll download a translation app, right? Perhaps book a tour with a guide who speaks your native language?
When it comes to science communications, we, the scientific ambassadors, are the equivalent of those translation apps or tour guides. It’s our job to explain to our audience the important facts in language they are familiar with. And most people are not familiar with the language of science. Well, it’s not an official language, but we certainly have our fair share of jargon and styles that make our communications hard to understand.
When the public consumes scientific content, it’s usually part of their “infotainment.” Even if they are trying to solve a problem, they are not going to approach listening to your YouTube video or read your blog with the gusto of a co-worker in your field. It’s our job to be clear and concise. Offering accurate, relatable information with some analogies is our job as effective science communicators. Humor helps if you have it.
Let’s look at this example from Gwen Pearson, an entomologist. She compares a technical description of research to a simplified (and funny) version:
Technical version: Insect exoskeletons pass through a bat’s digestive tract relatively unchanged other than mastication and mechanical damage. Therefore, the reflective properties of the cuticle remain unchanged.
Public version: Bats have sparkly poop because they eat insects.
As Pearson says, “we aren’t making information simple for stupid people; we are translating our complex disciplinary language for non-native speakers of science. Those non-native speakers are busy and smart.”1
Now, of course, sparkly bat poop isn’t a full explanation of her research. However, it gets people’s attention, and that makes it a good lead. With a few more simple, relatable sentences, she might have a captivated audience, willing to stick with listening to other information she provides.
Let’s quickly look at how this gap in “science language” processing may start. Most people who go into scientific fields already did well in science and math in high school. Most continued studying the same subjects in college. However, those who choose other career paths may stop with high school subjects – or take just enough science and math to fulfill graduation requirements. So, right there at the end of high school, there is a growing gap between those who are “fluent in science speak” and those who are not.
Another example: Many of us take a foreign language course in high school. Often, we don’t continue taking it in college. If we continued to study it through college, we’d be more proficient in that second language, right?
Scientists can learn to adapt our language based on our audience and improve communications to suit any audience. In addition, we can learn to take more, and better photos, that help us in all our communications. I’ll explore techniques in future blogs.
Read more about better written communications here:
Communicating so people understand (Readability)
Written by Susan V. Fisk, BS(Chem), M.Ed., MBA. Copyright by author.
Relatable Science 
8 thoughts on “Science: does it become a second language?”