{"title":"法律语言作为法律的创伤和康复之路","authors":"Ros Macdonald","doi":"10.1080/03050710600800012","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Commentators, legal and non‐legal, have, down the centuries, criticised legal writing as unnecessarily verbose, often ambiguous, and generally not conducive to promoting access to justice. This is still largely the case today. This paper attempts to explain why this state of affairs exists, and proposes ways to rehabilitate the language so that it is in more in keeping with the consensus of what modern legal writing should be. Examples taken from documents currently in use illustrate the problems and plain English principles provide the vehicle for change.","PeriodicalId":107403,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Commonwealth Law and Legal Education","volume":"5 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2006-11-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"LEGAL LANGUAGE AS A TRAUMA OF LAW AND THE ROAD TO REHABILITATION\",\"authors\":\"Ros Macdonald\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/03050710600800012\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Commentators, legal and non‐legal, have, down the centuries, criticised legal writing as unnecessarily verbose, often ambiguous, and generally not conducive to promoting access to justice. This is still largely the case today. This paper attempts to explain why this state of affairs exists, and proposes ways to rehabilitate the language so that it is in more in keeping with the consensus of what modern legal writing should be. Examples taken from documents currently in use illustrate the problems and plain English principles provide the vehicle for change.\",\"PeriodicalId\":107403,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Commonwealth Law and Legal Education\",\"volume\":\"5 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2006-11-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Commonwealth Law and Legal Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/03050710600800012\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Commonwealth Law and Legal Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03050710600800012","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
LEGAL LANGUAGE AS A TRAUMA OF LAW AND THE ROAD TO REHABILITATION
Commentators, legal and non‐legal, have, down the centuries, criticised legal writing as unnecessarily verbose, often ambiguous, and generally not conducive to promoting access to justice. This is still largely the case today. This paper attempts to explain why this state of affairs exists, and proposes ways to rehabilitate the language so that it is in more in keeping with the consensus of what modern legal writing should be. Examples taken from documents currently in use illustrate the problems and plain English principles provide the vehicle for change.