Talk:Simplified English
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I've reverted this addition to the article:
Sceptics counter that Simplified English is:
- linguistically naive
- commercially astute
I've never seen these particular criticisms of simplified English and I couldn't find anything on the web. Not that that necessarily means anything, but I think I'd like to see a source. --Lee Hunter 20:42, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Aerospace standard
I have made some changes to this page in order to clarify the nature and history of the aerospace standard. I removed the claim that Simplified English can help with second language acquisition, since that is not one of the claims made by those who advocate controlled language writing standards. --Rick Wojcik
The reference to the "U.S. Government's Plain English" seems to indicate that there is such a thing, while the reference merely quotes the Paperwork Reduction Act that says that documents should be written "using plain, coherent, and unambiguous terminology and is understandable to those who are to respond...". Is there a reference to a governmental reduced English language? I know of none and it is likely that the governmental and NATO work built on the Aerospace standards is the only related effort. Jbottoms76 19:11, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
I agree with your point. The problem is that Wikipedia has no direct reference to the US Government's Plain Language program (see http://www.plainlanguage.gov). The Wikipedia entry for Plain language contains a link to the government web site, but the article content does not refer to it.
[edit] Label on link to simple english wikipedia
Why does the label on the link to the simple english wikipedia render as "Simplified English edition of Wikipedia?"
It's misleading, since the simple english wikipedia is not written in Simplified English. I actually clicked it thinking that there really was an "ASD Simplified Technical English" wikipedia. martin 12:50, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
