I recently read an interesting article about how scientists use words differently to most people. This isn't jargon where most people don't know the words but rather a case of 'it doesn't mean what you think it means'. One of the best examples of this is the word 'theory', which shows up in the arguments of ID proponents a lot. They're thinking of the common meaning, a hypothesis or a guess, whereas in science it has a much more strictly defined meaning. According to the United States National Academy of Sciences, 'In science, the word theory refers to a comprehensive explanation of an important feature of nature supported by facts gathered over time. Theories also allow scientists to make predictions about as yet unobserved phenomena.'
So, I've been thinking about how we alter our writing for our target audience. When I first started doing my master's, I thought this was a ridiculous concept. I was going to use the words that I thought were best and I'd be damned if I was going to pander to some ignoramus with a limited vocabulary and a fear of big words. I like to think I've learnt since then and that I realise this isn't the case. Now, I realise that tailoring to your audience isn't about judging what you think the readers will understand but about trying to understand how pieces in this field are written and, quite importantly, asking 'does this mean what I think it means?'
However, tailoring to an audience is not just about word choice; style is a big factor as well. (This could probably illustrate the above point as well. Here, I mean writing in a particular manner, not writing with flair.) My work for WIPO provides a good example. A translation must not only be accurate but they have a particular in-house style that must be adhered to. For example, the avoidance of pronouns and an insistence on a full colon before a list punctuated with semi colons, even if all my grammar books say one doesn't belong there. So, tailoring a translation to this audience means writing in a particular way, not just using particular words (although there is an element of this as well).
Of course we must product an accurate translating of what the author has originally written, but no piece of writing exists in a vacuum so we also need to consider the audience and whether or not our translation will help the author communicate with that audience. Because if it doesn't, then no matter how accurate it is, no matter how beautiful a piece of writing, no matter how much effort we put into it, if it doesn't help the author communicate with their audience, we have failed.