chrissy
Ex-Bluelighter
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2003
- Messages
- 971
ok so im taking this subject for 2nd year, Legal Writing and Drafting and i want to argue my essay based on the view that keeping with tradition and keeping legalese is actually more beneficial than resorting to plain language, which may prima facie seem like an adequate solution but it really isnt (i was reading an article by Robyn Penman who put forward the notion that simple words dont necessarily equal understanding and that what is needed is an actual revamp of communication and realising that different ppl understand differently).
anyway, i need an original argument, im sort of starting to formulate one on the line of what she was saying, as well as on the line that if we are to resort to Plain English, (which the public can read better than law documents, but which as mentioned before, doesnt equate to better understanding), certain legal concepts may be "lost in translation", and because some concepts of law will take more words to explain in Plain English, thus boring the reader which gives up after two sentences, law will lose its essence. not to mention the legal profession going down the drain and not to mention the fact that this will lead to more ambiguity for certain words (although this is not empirically founded)
^^ the above is what i can come up with so far. id appreciate any input, as i really wanna develop the above ideas, so if you have anything to comment on that ive already mentioned or if you have something new to add, please by all means do so.
if you are involved in the legal system
do you use traditional legalese? (this may only apply if you happen to draft documents or work in a law firm)
how much easier is it to write in legalese than in plain english and would you bother to do so for a client/general public's benefit?
do you 'pride' youself in being able to talk the talk not many can talk?
please add any other comments you may have.
if you are not involved in the system, i want to hear from you too.
have you ever come across legal documents you could not understand? how long did it take you to read this document before you made sense of it? did you have to ask a professional for interpretation?
do you have trouble comprehending easily READ language at times? does it seem hard to understand?
please add any other comments you may have.
thanks for reading. im sure this is a valid concept, even if you despise the system or arent involved in it, etc etc. because it DOES concern you, because you need to be able to know what the law is so as to act in accordance with it and if you cannot comprehend that law, problems arise. please think outside the square with your replies, dont think of it as a general application to you- ie. if you know of instances where ppl favour one over the other please say so.
thanks again!
anyway, i need an original argument, im sort of starting to formulate one on the line of what she was saying, as well as on the line that if we are to resort to Plain English, (which the public can read better than law documents, but which as mentioned before, doesnt equate to better understanding), certain legal concepts may be "lost in translation", and because some concepts of law will take more words to explain in Plain English, thus boring the reader which gives up after two sentences, law will lose its essence. not to mention the legal profession going down the drain and not to mention the fact that this will lead to more ambiguity for certain words (although this is not empirically founded)
^^ the above is what i can come up with so far. id appreciate any input, as i really wanna develop the above ideas, so if you have anything to comment on that ive already mentioned or if you have something new to add, please by all means do so.
if you are involved in the legal system
do you use traditional legalese? (this may only apply if you happen to draft documents or work in a law firm)
how much easier is it to write in legalese than in plain english and would you bother to do so for a client/general public's benefit?
do you 'pride' youself in being able to talk the talk not many can talk?
please add any other comments you may have.
if you are not involved in the system, i want to hear from you too.
have you ever come across legal documents you could not understand? how long did it take you to read this document before you made sense of it? did you have to ask a professional for interpretation?
do you have trouble comprehending easily READ language at times? does it seem hard to understand?
please add any other comments you may have.
thanks for reading. im sure this is a valid concept, even if you despise the system or arent involved in it, etc etc. because it DOES concern you, because you need to be able to know what the law is so as to act in accordance with it and if you cannot comprehend that law, problems arise. please think outside the square with your replies, dont think of it as a general application to you- ie. if you know of instances where ppl favour one over the other please say so.
thanks again!