User:Quercus solaris/Perspicuity is perspicuous, but its name isn't

A joke similar to "espouse elucidation" is "pursue perspicuity": the goal is perspicuous writing, yet that name for it is heterologically useless. It occurred to me that to fix this little motto, you could replace "perspicuity" with "readability", because given read- + ability, anyone can guess more or less what readability is just by looking at its name, and they'll be more or less right. Of course, if you've had enough exposure to romance, you can also see through "perspicuity" almost as well, and those of you who have, and just did, will excuse one more little wink that is cooked into that statement. (Did you see through it?) But anyway, if we did switch to "readability", how would we maintain the snappy alliteration for aphoristic purposes? I suppose we'd need an "r" word that gets across the meaning of "make" or "achieve". Well, OK then: we could have "realize readability", but I don't entirely like that one, because "realize" means "become aware of" more often than it means "make real".

"Explain plainly", we could say, trading our alliteration for internal rhyme. Thinking on these themes made me wonder: Now that we have the word mansplaining (which is transparently enough man + ’splaining), might we likewise have plainsplaining? What then is the art of plainsplaining the act of plainsplaining? Is it splainsplaining? If I beg you to do it clearly, is that plainsplainsplaining, which is to say, splainssplaining plainly? One might call it the pedagogy of exposition, or one might call it all just a pain in the spleen.