Simplification that omits critical limitations creates misleading transparency

What it is

Semantic fidelity under simplification requires plain wording both to avoid overclaiming and to retain important facts that would affect an ordinary reader's choice. Actor, action, object, quantifier, condition, and time must remain true, but logical truth is only necessary. “We collect email” is entailed by “we collect email and share it with a third party,” yet still hides a decision-changing recipient.

Why it happens

Simplification often substitutes a prototype for the full set: “sometimes” becomes “never,” “some processors” becomes “our service,” or a time-limiting clause disappears. Readers conventionally interpret an unqualified sentence as a general commitment rather than inventing hidden exceptions. A sentence can therefore become grammatically easier and less truthful at the same time.

Studying it

Use observable runtime behavior as the baseline and build separate condition matrices for full and simplified explanations. First test whether behavior and full propositions support each rewrite; then audit coverage of purpose, recipients, high-impact risks, and decision-changing limits. Ask ordinary readers to answer positive cases, minimal counterexamples, and what else could change their choice. If full text conflicts with runtime behavior, neither text is a valid truth source.

Where it stops holding

Fidelity does not require equal information volume or prohibit qualifiers such as “normally,” “only when,” or “unless.” Coverage is task- and audience-relative: every technical detail need not appear, but facts that reverse the main impression, alter choice, or materially raise risk cannot disappear. A rewrite so hedged that no behavior could falsify it also fails.

Applying it

• Annotate source and simplified sentences with actor, action, object, quantifier, condition, and time; never delete negation or qualification without review.
• Flag high-risk absolutes such as “always,” “never,” “only,” “anonymous,” and “we,” requiring proof of referent and scope.
• Map each simplified claim to both its full clause and observable behavior; when they conflict, repair behavior and all explanations rather than allowing long text to certify itself.
• Gate on truth, coverage of decision-important propositions, and ordinary-reader interpretation; fail overclaiming, consequential omission, and unfalsifiable vagueness alike.

Related

• Same group: O2.08.1 Legalese barriers · O2.08.2 Measure readability through comprehension · O2.08.3 Icons and examples build mental models
• Adjacent: O1.05.6 Layered consent information · O2.02.2 Summary first with expandable detail
• Search terms: semantic fidelity under simplification · truth-conditional fidelity · privacy claim entailment