Write a passage of a contract of your own creation with at least three legal terms. See the example of the mobile phone contract provided in the lesson. The Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines legal language as “the language used by lawyers that is difficult for most people to understand; legalese. It is a language based on the use of archaic terms, poor grammar and sentence structure, and unnecessary repetition. One commentator described it a little differently: “Legal jargon – is pompous and boring, adds nothing substantial, gives a false sense of accuracy and obscures gaps in analysis.” Gerald Lebovits, On Terra Firma with English, Scribes J. of Legal Writing 2014-15, p. 123. When creating legal guidelines for your business, avoid legal language, a form of drafting that makes your policies unnecessarily complicated. Example: I don`t understand most of the terms and conditions of this app. It`s all legalese. This article discusses the importance of legal language, reasons to avoid legal language, and best drafting practices for your legal policies. When customers see legal language in your business policies, they may feel confused, offended, or simply reluctant to engage with your business. All of these feelings make customers less inclined to make a purchase or sign up for membership.
Given the frequency, one would think that lawyers would have a course in law school that deals with “how to write in legal language” – but that`s not where it comes from. There are laws around the world that explicitly prohibit the use of legal language in legal policies. Court documents are often the last to be updated to avoid legal language, even though lawyers (who aren`t really quick as a profession) have gone beyond this style of writing. I love contracts – and especially technology-related contracts written in plain English! I have worked extensively on intellectual property contracts and in particular IT contracts (SaaS, subscription framework agreements, terms of service, privacy policies, license agreements, etc.) and developed my own technological solutions that help to design, review and adapt complex contracts quickly and thoroughly. Common legal terms include the following, which we have covered in this lesson: If Wikipedia did not lie to me, the fundamental development of legal language occurred as follows: But is there a disadvantage to using such language? Ordinary citizens would be bound by legal instruments that cannot be deciphered otherwise in English, and the courts have refused to enforce these agreements to the detriment of the authors. See In re Benninger, 357 B.R. 337 (Bankr. W.D. Pa. 2006); Paladino v. Avnet Computer Techs., Inc., 134 F.3d 1054 (11th Cir.
1988); Nicosia v. Wakefern Food Corp., 643 A.2d 554 (N.J. 1994). Below is an example of the terms and conditions of the Strawberry Mobile Phones Agreement. It deals with the guarantees provided by the company. See how many examples of legal language you can identify: In many ways, the ideologies of the plain language movement follow the model of linguistic subordination described by sociolinguist Rosina Lippi-Greene, in which one language variety is subordinated to another through a process of mystification, prescription, and normalization. The hoax occurs whenever self-proclaimed language guardians claim that the language is in decline and needs to be corrected. A prescription occurs when these same tutors then claim the power to prescribe rules for the use of language, legitimizing certain usages or styles, while stigmatizing others. Finally, standardization takes place when guardians perpetuate the idea that these rules will lead to a purer and higher standard for all linguistic uses. The plain language movement largely followed these processes of subordination in order to remedy the problems it associated with legal language.
But each of these processes is based on specific myths about language that are criticized by current sociolinguistic literature. As self-proclaimed guardians of language, plain language advocates should therefore be aware of the following three myths: prescriptivism, standard language ideology, and moral superiority. It is generally acceptable for lawyers to use legal language when it comes to contracts. However, the use of legal language is one of the reasons why so many people need to hire lawyers to help them review and revise contracts. Legal language can quickly become confusing for someone who isn`t a lawyer, so hiring specialized expertise is a great way to avoid this.