The clause: that have simple, easy to understand alternativ

[NewHope]

Context:
Remember, your writing should be interesting but also easy to read and understand. Does this mean you should avoid technical language? No. You may need to use technical terms, but avoid impressive-sounding nonsense words that have simple, easy to understand alternatives.

Does the clause meant "It is technical terms that have simple, easy to understand alternatives"?

In addition, I think the author used "simple, easy to understand" as an adjective to modify "alternatives". Right?

 

[Casiopea]

Re: The clause: that have simple, easy to understand altern

Context:
Remember, your writing should be interesting but also easy to read and understand. Does this mean you should avoid technical language? No. You may need to use technical terms, but avoid impressive-sounding nonsense words that have simple, easy to understand alternatives.

Does the clause meant "It is technical terms that have simple, easy to understand alternatives"?

In addition, I think the author used "simple, easy to understand" as an adjective to modify "alternatives". Right?

'impressive-sounding nonsense words' means, big words. Words that you might think make you sound 'smart' but, nonetheless, words that the reader probably isn't familiar with (e.g., Sam is garrulous = Sam is talkative).

The author is saying that it's important to know your audience. Use words the reader knows. The reason being, you want the reader to be able to understand what you are saying. If you use words that are too complicated--for a given audience--, you'll lose your reader. Know your audience.

Techincal terms are not 'big words' if they are used to refer to specialized language (e.g., Waste Management Engineer = garbageman/garbagewoman).

All the best,

 

[NewHope]

Thanks Casiopea. The reply is good!

 

[Casiopea]

Thanks Casiopea. The reply is good!

You're welcome.