Jargon has a legitimate use
Your Zinsser note makes an important distinction. Jargon often begins as efficient communication among people who share a domain.
The problem is not technical vocabulary itself. The problem is a mismatch between vocabulary and reader.
Use the technical term when one of these holds:
- It is more precise than plain alternatives.
- The reader already uses it.
- It names a distinction the argument needs.
- Repeating the plain-language explanation would create more friction.
Define or replace the term when it creates more translation work than value.
Definitions should expose boundaries
A definition is load-bearing when the argument depends on where a category begins or ends.
If you write "large customer," "material risk," "early stage," "high confidence," or "operationally complex," the reader may need a threshold or an observable criterion.
A useful definition has two forms:
- Intensional: the properties that make something a member of the category.
- Extensional: concrete examples that show the boundary in practice.
This is why your Musings process requires both for observational pieces that depend on a concept.
Beware persuasive definitions
Do not define a disputed choice with a word that already contains the verdict.
Calling a process "bureaucracy" before proving that its coordination cost exceeds its control value is not a neutral definition. Strip the emotional label and see what remains.
One name for one thing
Avoid synonym cycling in technical writing. If two terms are different, define the difference. If they are the same, choose one.