I know a few people whom admitted their dislike for people with sophisticated vocabularies. They believe listening to someone who utilizes fancy words is a complete waste of time; and if somebody’s purpose is to deliver a message, then they should speak in terms their audience can understand.
I’ve heard “regular” people say this about people with PhDs, and I’ve heard people with PhDs say this about poets.
They don’t have a problem with a doctor using medical terminology, but if a mechanic utilizes legal terminology to explain their unfriendly encounter with law enforcement; that person is perceived as “trying to act uppity”.
I agree that even the most remedial writers and speakers should take their audience’s demographics into consideration. I also believe the audience should feel responsible for their own discipline. It’s no secret that you should probably shut up while someone is speaking, and you probably shouldn’t go to a gallery and touch an expensive painting.
It’s called universal respect.
A speaker’s goal is to appeal to their audience in some form. Nonetheless, everything is not always about the audience. Speakers shouldn’t have to sacrifice their creativity for your childish comfort. Just like a painter selects which colors to use, and a musician selects which notes to play; a writer selects which words accurately conveys their message.
I can pretty much guarantee there are very few writers who select words that are designed to make their audience feel inferior. That feeling of frustration you get when someone uses the term “brusque” is your subconscious telling you you’re uncomfortable with your own ignorance. You should probably do something about that.
It’s very rude for you to expect someone to alter the terms they hand picked to bring their vision to light, because you’re too lazy to look them up.
I don’t care if it’s a medical, legal, or an economic term. If I know it, I’m going to use it. How the hell are you going to tell me how limited you think my vocabulary should be….
Fuck outta here.