Emphasising the need for plain language has certainly improved legal writing and
heightened the awareness of both lawyers and laity for legal texts to be clearly written.
By and large, however, the plain language movement has focused on the area covered by
Level 1 and Level 2 of the model. It has scarcely touched Level 6, overall structure,
which is the principal location of problems with legal writing.
80
3.2 Level 1: Words
Level 1 Words
Choose the right words. Use words in their correct sense.
You can't find words for every thought They come a single time,
Like signal esoteric sips Of sacramental wine.
81
Introduction
Level 1 incorporates the premise that part of good writing is to choose the right words
and, by way of double indemnity, to use words in their correct sense. Here there is some
general advice and discussion of two special questions - use of foreign words and use of
non sexist language.
General Advice
Most fundamentally, it is necessary to know the correct meaning of words and use the
right one for your purpose. This advice applies to all words, but has special relevance for
technical terms. These may simply be special terms, special terms with synonyms or
terms in ordinary usage that are used in a discipline in a special way. To handle these it is
necessary to use a good reference book. It may be a general dictionary, a law dictionary,
a dictionary for the relevant discipline, or a thesaurus.
It is also necessary to be sensitive to three facts. First, some dictionaries are badly
written. Second, not all entries in a dictionary fully capture the use and meaning of a
term. Third, terms move around and end up with a range of meanings, even if these
meanings are connected. In this regard, be aware that words have at least three sources of
meaning - origin, derivation and usage. Logically, origin and derivation should determine
their meaning but meaning is not always a matter of logic. Sometimes usage, even usage
contrary to the logic, determines meaning in a manner similar to the operation of the legal
maxim communis error facit lex. (This means that common mistakes make law – if
enough people accept an erroneous view of the law it is considered right).
(2003), Eagleson (1990), Duckworth (1996), Eagleson (1986A) and (1986B). For
criticism of plain English see Murray (1997). For discussion of legal language see
Butt and Castle (2001), Chaim (1983), Danet (1980), Duckworth (2003), Fairclough
(1989), Mellinkoff (1963), Radcliff (1965), Shuy (1986), Turnbull (1997).
80
Duckworth in Sheard (2003) p 93, when advocating plain language certainly acknowledges the
need for a clear overall structure when saying that plain language also is about “organising ideas so that
they make more sense to the reader.” The problem is that the plain language movement has not come up
with any solutions to the problems that legal writing has through lack of an overall structure.
81
Emily Dickinson
 |
 |
 |