Home / Resources / Language Access

Language Access

Plain Language Before Translation: Why It Cuts Cost and Improves Comprehension

Writing in plain language before you translate lowers the number of words you pay to translate. It removes ambiguity that leads to translation errors. It also produces text that people with limited English proficiency can understand and act on. Federal guidance, including CMS translation guidelines, names clear source text as the first step.

Key takeaways

Plain language lowers the number of source words you pay to translate, in every language.
Clear source text means fewer translator queries and fewer translation errors.
In our example, a 76-word notice became 39 words.
Test the English source and each translation with real readers.

In this guide

76 to 39

Words in our before and after example

2010

Year the Plain Writing Act became law

6 guidelines

Core federal plain language practices

What Is Plain Language?

The Plain Writing Act of 2010 (Public Law 111-274) became law on October 13, 2010. It defines plain writing as “writing that is clear, concise, well-organized, and follows other best practices appropriate to the subject or field and intended audience.”

The Act requires federal agencies to use plain writing in covered documents, train staff and report on compliance. It does not create a right to sue. It does not bind state agencies, local governments or private organizations, though many follow its guidance.

The federal plain language guidelines first appeared on PlainLanguage.gov. Digital.gov now hosts the Plain Language Guide Series, which carries forward selected PlainLanguage.gov content. Digital.gov describes plain language as “communication that is clear and easy to understand for your target audience.” Core practices include:

Write for a specific audience.
Put the most important information first.
Use short sentences and common words.
Use active voice so readers know who does what.
Define terms you must keep.
Test the content with real readers.

Why Does Plain Language Matter for Health Literacy?

Healthy People 2030, as summarized by the CDC, defines personal health literacy as “the degree to which individuals have the ability to find, understand, and use information and services to inform health-related decisions.” It defines organizational health literacy as how well organizations “equitably enable” people to do the same.

A key national measure of US adult health literacy is the 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy, published by the National Center for Education Statistics in 2006. It found that 53 percent of adults had Intermediate health literacy. About 22 percent had Basic health literacy. Another 14 percent had Below Basic health literacy.

The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) Health Literacy Universal Precautions Toolkit, now in its third edition, asks providers to structure information and services “in ways that everyone can understand and use.”

These challenges exist in every language. Translation does not make a hard text easier. The CMS Toolkit for Making Written Material Clear and Effective states it directly: “If the English text is too difficult, the translated text will probably also be too difficult.”

How Does Simpler Source Text Reduce Translation Cost?

Translation is commonly priced per source word. Every word you remove from the English source is a word you do not pay to translate in each target language.

The savings multiply with each language. Here is simple arithmetic, not a measured result: if you cut a 2,000-word notice to 1,400 words and translate it into 10 languages, you remove 6,000 words of translation work. You also shorten turnaround and review time in every language.

Plain language lowers cost in other ways too:

Fewer translator queries. Clear sentences need fewer questions to your program staff.
Better translation memory reuse. Consistent terms and repeated standard sentences match previous translations more often.
Easier updates. Short, modular text is faster to revise when a rule or program changes.

How Does Plain Language Reduce Translation Errors?

Digital.gov notes that plain language helps “when content needs to be translated in multiple languages, as translators are most often generalists.” A generalist translator may not know your program’s internal terms.

Common sources of error in English source text include:

Idioms and figures of speech that have no direct equivalent.
Undefined acronyms and program names.
Passive voice that hides who must act.
Double negatives and long conditional sentences.
Several terms for the same thing, such as “member,” “enrollee” and “beneficiary.”

CMS advises translators to “translate for meaning (rather than word for word), in a culturally sensitive way.” Plain source text makes the intended meaning clear, so the translator does not have to guess.

Want clearer content before you translate?

We rewrite English source text in plain language and test translations with community reviewers.

What Does Plain Language Look Like Before and After?

The example below is written for this article. It is not from a client project.

Before (76 words): “Pursuant to program requirements, beneficiaries who fail to submit the requisite documentation substantiating continued eligibility prior to the expiration of the renewal period may be subject to the termination of benefits. In the event that the aforementioned documentation cannot be furnished within the prescribed timeframe due to extenuating circumstances, individuals are advised to contact the agency at their earliest convenience in order to request an extension, which may be granted at the discretion of program staff.”

After (39 words): “Send us proof that you still qualify by June 30. If you do not, your benefits may stop. Need more time? Call us at the number below before June 30. We may be able to give you an extension.”

The plain version is about half as long. It names the deadline, tells the reader what to do and uses words any generalist translator can render accurately.

How Should You Test Content With Speakers of the Target Language?

Testing tells you whether readers understand the content as you intended. Digital.gov recommends paraphrase testing for short documents and web pages. In a paraphrase test, a reader explains each section in their own words. Digital.gov suggests 6 to 9 interviews. It also advises teams to start testing early, before a document is final.

CMS recommends getting feedback “directly from your intended readers” of the translation. It notes that even brief interviews with 3 or 4 people can show problems with comprehension and cultural fit.

Community review applies these methods to each language:

Test the plain English source first.

Translate with qualified linguists who translate for meaning.

Ask community reviewers who speak the target language to read the translation.

Ask reviewers to explain the content in their own words, not to approve it.

Revise the translation and, when needed, the English source.

Recruit reviewers through community organizations, and consider paying them for their time.

Frequently Asked Questions

Does the Plain Writing Act apply to state and local agencies?

No. The Plain Writing Act of 2010 applies to federal executive agencies. State agencies, counties, cities, hospitals and health plans are not covered by it. Many state and local programs still use the federal plain language guidelines because clear writing supports their communication and language access goals. Check whether your state has its own plain language requirements.

Does plain language mean leaving out legal details?

No. Plain language keeps the required content and changes how it is presented. You can keep legally required information while using short sentences, headings and defined terms. For legal notices, ask counsel to review the plain version. This review is easier when the text is short and clear, and it happens once in English before translation.

Is plain language the same as machine translation preparation?

Not exactly, but the practices overlap. Plain language is written for human readers. Clear, consistent source text also tends to produce better results from machine translation. Any machine output for public or vital documents still needs post-editing and review by qualified human linguists.

How many community reviewers do we need per language?

Federal guidance suggests small groups work. Digital.gov recommends 6 to 9 paraphrase testing interviews. CMS notes that brief interviews with 3 or 4 readers of a translation can surface useful feedback. Choose reviewers who reflect your audience, including people from different regions and dialect backgrounds.

How AsianText Helps

Clear Content in English and Every Language

AsianText rewrites English source content in plain language before translation, then tests it with the people who will use it. Our Plain Language & Community Review service covers source rewriting, glossary development and reviews with speakers of each target language. Our Translation team works in 200+ language combinations under ISO 17100 processes. For high-volume content, we offer AI Translation & Post-Editing. Contact AsianText to plan your next multilingual project.

This article provides general information, not legal advice. Last updated October 5, 2026.

Written by Xun Yang

Part of the AsianText team, writing about language access, translation and interpreting for government, healthcare and life sciences.

Sources

Related Services

Ready to Simplify Before You Translate?

Tell us the languages, the content and the deadline. We reply with a fixed quote within one business day.

+1 123-456-7890