Why Is Lawyer's English Harder Than English

WHY IS LAWYER'S ENGLISH HARDER THAN ENGLISH?
By: Erlano Francisco R. Gacias
Consider the following two sentences:
Sentence 1: For the purpose of controlling how his bonsai collection could thereafter be taken
cared of and displayed subsequent to his death, the bonsai artist created thereof a very
restrictive trust with a view therein to keeping everything exactly as it was during his lifetime.
Sentence 2: To control how his bonsai collection could be cared of and displayed after his death,
the bonsai artist created a very restrictive trust, hoping to keep everything exactly as it was
during his lifetime.
Question: What is the difference between the aforementioned two sentences?
Answer: The first sentence was written with the use of “lawyerly” English, while the second
sentence was written using plain English.
In the Philippines, the use of the English language dominates the legal domain, despite the fact
that there are at least 186 different languages in the country. This is because the legal basis for
this practice is enshrined in our Constitution. Sec. 7, Article XIV of the 1987 Constitution
provides thus: “For purposes of communication and instruction, the official languages of the
Philippines are Filipino and, until otherwise provided by law, English.” Executive Order No. 210
(Establishing the policy to strengthen the use of the English language as a medium of instruction
in the educational system) further strengthened this policy.
There has been, however, a huge contrast between legal English and everyday spoken English.
Try to read a simple affidavit written by a lawyer. The fact that the paper would be peppered with
words like "whereas," "wherefore," "whereof," "thereof," and other "lawyerly" words, would
already strain a layman's eyes. Add to them the words "heretofore," "wheretofore," and such
other legal gobbledygook, and what do you think would the ordinary layman understand?
Legal English is supposed to be more precise with its information and the words it uses. However,
as we see practicing lawyers now, they use eight or more words to say what we could say in only
two. Arcane phrases and long, mind-numbing sentences are used to express commonplace
ideas. Seeking to be precise, they become redundant. Seeking to be cautious, they become
verbose. Seeking to be on point, they become tautological. Just like a mango tree that is
crowned with so many leaves but is bereft with fruit, lawyerly English becomes too verbose but
with so little substance. And hence, legal English not only becomes wordy, unclear, pompous
and dull. It also becomes ridiculous and comical. It becomes a joke.
Perhaps, many lawyers have trouble in using plain English because of the attention to detail that
the study of law requires. Or perhaps many lawyers just want to sound smart or to intellectually
impress others with their grasp of the law. Or perhaps they do this so that no one can argue the
meaning of their words. Or again, perhaps the use of legalese is to sound "professional" for their
clients. Nevertheless, the obvious victims here are of course English, the law, and the expression
and communication of the law. As it is, legal English is now primarily made up of “lawyerisms,”
legal jargon or legalese. Words like "aforementioned," "whereas," "res gestae," and "hereinafter"
give writing a legal smell, although they carry little or no legal substance. And hence, legal writing
has received a lot of criticism with its very particular style.
Fortunately, a reform movement that seeks to use plain legal language is now changing the legal
profession itself. This started in 1970s when banks, manufacturers, and other businesses
discovered that documents written in plain language can reduce costs and increase profits. For
instance, it was found out that an automaker's clearly written warranty can help sell cars, and a
lender's clearly written loan agreement can reduce costly defaults and foreclosures.
Understandable government regulations and forms have similar benefits. They can reduce the
amount of staff time spent answering questions from puzzled citizens. Hence, a few legislatures
have henceforth passed laws that require documents such as insurance policies and consumer
contracts to be written in plain language.
Surely, better communication skills can cut unnecessary costs and result in higher economic
yields for businesses. It can lead to better understanding amongst peoples and nations and
therefore significantly reduce crime rate, and on a larger scale, limit the chances of diplomatic
misunderstanding, and consequently, war. Making legal language more straightforward would
help people understand their rights and obligations better, and therefore be less susceptible to
being unnecessarily punished or not being able to benefit from their entitled rights.
And hence, law students are now required under a new curriculum to study the correct use of
legal English. After all, sentences should, as much as possible, be concise to give the reader
relief and make reading light, smooth and even a pleasure. Verbs should assert action rather
than tell a condition -- unfortunately a nasty habit which lawyers are wont to do. Hopefully,
when these law students become lawyers themselves, they will avoid saying: “Your honor, I am
interposing an objection to the witness’ statement therein.” Because, what is the shorter and
best way to say it?
Well, just say: “Objection, your honor!”

Why Is Lawyer's English Harder Than English

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Why Is Lawyer's English Harder Than English

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Why Is Lawyer's English Harder Than English

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

WHY IS LAWYER'S ENGLISH HARDER THAN ENGLISH?

By: Erlano Francisco R. Gacias

Consider the following two sentences:

Question: What is the difference between the aforementioned two sentences?

Well, just say: “Objection, your honor!”

You might also like

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.