Legalese

Linguists identify legalese as a distinctive dialect. One reason this has come about is that legalese has not evolved in step with modern English. Language is constantly evolving with daily usage. But legal language has been conservative and somewhat static.

* Legalese uses outdated grammar and sentence structures. It also tends to use improper or non-standard punctuation, passive voice, and awkward pronoun references
* Legalese is wordy, turgid, and impersonal.
* Legal language suffers from the use of archaic vocabulary.
* Legalese suffers from an excessive use of jargon and technical terms without the definitions that the layperson requires.
* It has some genuine legal terms of art that Professor Robert Benson defines in a question: Does the term have an uncontroversial core meaning that could not be conveyed succinctly in any other way? Benson suggests that there are less than 100 genuine legal terms of art. When used with the layperson, terms of art should be explained.
* It uses everyday words while giving them extraordinary connotations and meanings without defining those special meanings.
* It clings to foreign words, especially french and latin.

The point I am making is that legalese is an outmoded legal institution which law schools teach us to use. Legalese is a block to communication with clients; it has made lawyers the butt of jokes for centuries. Chaucer ridiculed lawyers for their langauge.

Legalese was once defined as "the language of lawyers that they would not otherwise use in ordinary communications but for the fact that they are lawyers".1

A legalism has been defined as "a word or phrase that a lawyer might use in drafting a contract or a pleading but would not use in conversation with his wife".2 The definition should, of course, add "or her husband".

1. Robinson, Drafting - Its Substance and Teaching. 25 J.of Legal Education 514,516 n.12(1973) quoted in A Brief for Plain English Wills and Trusts, Thomas S. Word, Jr. University of Richmond Law Review, Vol. 14 Spring 1980 No.3 471

2. Smith, A primer of Opinion Writing, For New Judges, 21 Arkansas Law Review 197, 209 (1967) quoted in Word as above.

A game to play while sitting through the negotiations or the drafting instructions.

Thanks for stopping by! If you found this lens useful, scroll up and rate it by clicking on a star. And learn more about Plain Language and Legalese at PlainLanguage.com.

All contents of this lens ©2008 Cheryl Stephens. Plain Language Wizardry is a trademark of Cheryl Stephens.