# Technical language should be treated like an actual other language In the same way that the same set of sounds can be used in different languages, words can be used in different *senses.* Technical language, using combinations of words in a technical sense, usually sounds like English but it should be treated like a language that you can become more or less fluent in. Technical languages are characterized by their precision and compression. The precision of definitions in technical language is not just people being anal. It’s as critical to the language as tones are in Chinese. Just because you know “Hola, Como estas?” does not mean that you know Spanish. Similarly, just because you know a few technical words, does not mean you understand the language. Although in both situations it is a good way of building trust. [[People like to create shibboleths to distinguish their tribe]]. English is good at appropriating technical words the same way that it is good at appropriating words from other language. When this happens, especially with technical words, the definition is transferred but most of the connotations are lost. In the case of technical words, understanding the word’s connotation usually means understanding its affordances. [[Understanding a thing has to do with intuiting the affordances of a thing]]. If you say “web server” to someone on the street, they probably have a sense of what it is. But if you say it to a professional programmer, it conjures many many more thoughts. [[Jargon is a mechanism for compressing information]]. In the same way that you can get a point across to someone who speaks Chinese by gesticulating with fairly universal human gestures (“I need water” “thank you” “me” “you”), you can get a rough technical idea across to someone even if you don’t speak their technical language. However, you’re not gesticulating *in Chinese.* But people act like they’re speaking a technical language when they’re talking about a technical thing. Another analogy is that a technical term used in a technical sense is like a sandcastle and used in a normal sense it’s like a sandcastle after a wave has washed over it. The opposite end of the compression spectrum from technical use of words is the poetic use of a word, where you’re not even sticking to *any* specific meaning of the word but using it for its evocative or audio qualities. There is no ‘correct’ sense of a word, in the same way that no language can lay claim to a sequence of sounds. Many misunderstandings and frustrations happen when there is a “sense-mismatch.” One person could be using a term in a non-technical sense and the other person is interpreting it in a technical sense or vice versa. Alternatively, someone could think that they speak the technical language better than they do and think they’re being technical when they haven’t internalized the affordances of what they’re talking about. However, sequences of words will tend towards different senses. While the sound “Wǒ” is both English and Chinese, the phrase “Whoah that’s cool” is clearly English and “Wǒ xǐhuān tāng” his clearly Chinese. Similarly, “Complex” is sense-agnostic, while “This is a complex situation” is normal-sense and “The complex interactions resulted in emergent behavior after ten time steps” is clearly technical. Unlike between languages, this phenomenon can create cognitive dissonance when someone creates a sentence that sounds like it *should* be technical but actually doesn’t mean anything. “This is panpsychic convergence theory. The ultimate von neumann probe is printing space and creating universes.” It’s basically a case of people using technical words in a poetic sense. This double-take inducing language is especially common in GPT-3 generated text. More broadly almost all AI generated language uses words in a poetic sense. The tricky part is that this poetic use of word combinations that sound like they should be technical can actually be the seeds of technical insights - “What would it be like to be chasing a beam of light?” [[Anyone on the knowledge frontier is a bit of a crackpot]]. The frustrating piece to me is that many people then stop there and leave it to lesser mortals to turn these poetic possibly profound possibly bullshit statements into precise technical ideas. Because [[Jargon is mystifying to people without the relevant context]], you often see people who don’t actually speak the technical language using technical terms to mystify others who don’t in the same way you might see someone trying to impress their friends by producing a cringe-worthy sentence in another language. In a similar tricky situation, it is important to have a well-defined technical vocabulary and at the same time essential that people be able to create new technical terms. Technical terms enable new thoughts and conversations so if you’re actually investigating something new it might be important to have new technical terms around it. However, everybody introducing new technical terms all the time leads to papers that only two people in the world can read. One end of the spectrum is French and the other end of the spectrum is a four-year-old’s made up language. Technical language is a two sided sword. On the one hand the combination of compression and precision enables conversations and thoughts that would not have been possible before. On the other hand it creates barriers to entry to understanding. While it can be relaxed somewhat - most things can be explained to a five year old ([[Explain it like I’m Five]]) There’s a limit to your ability to manipulate a concept without the precision and compression of technical language. [[The technicality barrier has something to do with replicability]]. This may be one of the [[Fundamental Tensions]]. Why does this pedantic deep dive matter? Explicitly embracing the fact that the same word can be used in different senses can enable better communication. I have no problem with someone who doesn’t understand the technical sense of a word using that word as long as we’re clear that they aren’t using it in the technical sense. Acknowledging that technical languages are different languages that take training and skill to master may lead to more respect for people’s mastery of them and their attention to detail when a phrase is meant in a technical sense. Technical language as a language would ideally lead to a bit more humility about the limits of non-technical language in describing and understanding a technical plan. [[Most roadmaps suck]] because they are written entirely in non-technical language with technical language used in a sense that means almost nothing. And yet, the roadmap puts on the face of being a long, detailed document. ### Related * [[Technical knowledge is important for evaluating tradeoffs]] * [[The right kind of conferences are the mid level not technical ones]] * [[One reason nerds may be so pedantic is because they have trouble intuiting the worlds affordances]] * [[Nobody has any idea what the affordances of human systems are]] [Web URL for this note](http://notes.benjaminreinhardt.com/Technical+language+should+be+treated+like+an+actual+other+language) [Comment on this note](http://via.hypothes.is/http://notes.benjaminreinhardt.com/Technical+language+should+be+treated+like+an+actual+other+language)