Detailed research throughout the world, and many “real-life” plainlanguage documents, have conclusively shown that the arguments raised against plain language are myths.

Writing in plain language does not involve abandoning legal concepts and replacing them with colloquial expressions. Lawyers who are expert in the relevant field are involved in any plain-language rewriting project. All essential legal concepts, terms, and phrases are preserved in plainlanguage documents.

But legal concepts form only a small percentage of any document — usually, much less than 2%. This leaves 98% of the document available for improvement. Also, remember that rewriting a document in plain language involves much more than mere word substitution, see 6.1.

The fears expressed about plain language and the arguments raised against it are myths.²⁶ Even judges prefer plain language—as is shown both by surveys and in court.²⁷

Surveys Surveys in Michigan, Florida, and Louisiana show that when judges (and lawyers) are shown two versions of a document, one in a traditional style and one in plain language, over 80% of them prefer the plain-language version.²⁸

In another survey, ten Californian appellate judges and their research attorneys compared plain-language versions of passages from appellate briefs with versions in a traditional style. They rated the traditional versions as "substantially weaker and less persuasive than the plain language versions". Also they inferred that the attorneys who wrote in legalese came from less prestigious law firms than those who wrote in plain language. ²⁹