School of Health Sciences, University of Dundee, Dundee, UK.
School of Politics, Philosophy, Language and Communication Studies, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK.
J Appl Res Intellect Disabil. 2024 Nov;37(6):e13293. doi: 10.1111/jar.13293.
Easy Read health documents prepared for people with intellectual disabilities are often generated from Standard Texts. Language in Easy Read versions is typically assumed to be simpler. However, simplification of language may have unintended consequences. This study aimed to explore the differences in language used between Easy Read health material and the Standard Text versions of the same material produced for the general population.
Five Easy Read/Standard Text pairs were sampled and analysed using Systemic Functional Linguistics. This addressed: how people with intellectual disabilities and others were represented by language, the author stance in relation to the reader and the overall organisation of the text.
The Easy Read versions often used language that was less empowering and inclusive.
Increased awareness of author power and better knowledge of the impact of language choice could help to redress these issues.
为智力残疾人士编写的易读健康文档通常是从标准文本生成的。易读版本的语言通常被认为更简单。然而，语言的简化可能会产生意想不到的后果。本研究旨在探索易读健康材料与为普通人群制作的相同材料的标准文本版本之间使用的语言的差异。
抽取了五个易读/标准文本对，并使用系统功能语言学进行了分析。这涉及到：语言如何代表智力残疾人士和其他人，作者相对于读者的立场以及文本的整体组织。
易读版本通常使用的语言不太有说服力，也不太包容。
提高对作者权力的认识和更好地了解语言选择的影响，可以帮助解决这些问题。
