The best way to damage an adversary’s positions when responding is to quote that person’s own words back to the judge or jury and then to demonstrate how inaccurate they were.
Jeremy Bentham (1748–1832) is known as a philosopher, economist and legal theorist whose work greatly influenced 19th-century legislation. He embarked on reforming many things, including legal language. A utilitarian, Bentham detested legal jargon, which he called the “perversion of language to the purpose of securing ignorance and misconception of the law on the part of the people.” It “converts the whole field of legislation into a thicket, impenetrable to the legislator’s eye: when he does work, he works blindfold; he works at random, at the hazard of creating more mischief than he cures.”
Professional copy editors tend to edit by rules that can be studied and learned. For each passage, choose the best answer that says something true about the quiz sentence.
Among language lovers, Johnson O’Connor is best known for his work in understanding how vocabulary augmentation is a major key in unlocking human potential. O’Connor used these words in the 1940s to test American adults, some college-educated and some not.
Seeking to bring the scientific method to bear on readability, Rudolph Flesch advocated a simple and direct style of writing: short paragraphs, short sentences, few prefixes and suffixes, and relative informality. He developed two measures for assessing readability: (1) reading ease and (2) human interest.
Some contractual provisions, perpetuated in deal after deal, make no literal sense. The problems are threefold: (1) whenever such a document is retyped, clerical errors are likely to occur; (2) the sameness of the party designations leads to cognitive difficulties for all readers—including the drafters themselves—because the only visual difference is the two-character suffix at the end; and (3) clients tend to resent such documents not just for their unreadability, but also for their appearing to be forms that the lawyer took little care in adapting.
Dec 1, 2018 1:55 AM CST
Bryan Garner: “What I’d like to explore in this column is the curiosity of ‘busts’–the prevalence of contractual provisions, sometimes perpetuated in deal after deal, that make no literal sense at all.” Photo by Winn Fuqua Photography
" />
In each question that follows, one choice is a misusage that wouldn’t pass muster with a good copy editor. See whether you can recognize the traditionally correct forms.
Nov 1, 2018 1:30 AM CDT
Bryan Garner: As a matter of linguistic epidemiology, if a malapropism becomes common enough, it becomes a nonstandard usage.” Photo by Winn Fuqua Photography
" />
Over time, words can change in spelling, meaning and pronunciation. In this quiz, choose the pronunciation favored in the late 19th century through the 20th.
There’s a widespread problem in the way junior lawyers answer questions by email. They tend to respond to moderately complex legal questions merely with answers—without explicitly repeating the question.
Aug 1, 2018 2:20 AM CDT
Bryan Garner: “A question that every legal writer should ask is: ‘When will clarity come?’” Photograph by Winn Fuqua Photography.
" />
Does the usual meaning of a word carry over to a legal definition? The 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled on this question in a case involving sports hero Jim Thorpe.
Lawyers are constantly creating definitions, seemingly to a greater extent as time goes by. These definitions appear mostly in transactional practice (contracts, wills, etc.) but also in legislative and regulatory work (statutes and rules)—and even in briefs.
Jun 1, 2018 1:25 AM CDT
Bryan Garner: “Lawyers are constantly creating definitions, seemingly to a greater extent as time goes by.” Photograph by Winn Fuqua Photography.
" />
Law review editors do their best to comply with prevailing literary usage. In this quiz, the language hasn’t yet come close to accepting the “incorrect” choices as standard written English.
The ABA Journal wants to host and facilitate conversations among lawyers about their profession. We are now accepting thoughtful, non-promotional articles and commentary by unpaid contributors.
Bryan Garner: “What I’d like to explore in this column is the curiosity of ‘busts’–the prevalence of contractual provisions, sometimes perpetuated in deal after deal, that make no literal sense at all.” Photo by Winn Fuqua Photography
" />
Bryan Garner: As a matter of linguistic epidemiology, if a malapropism becomes common enough, it becomes a nonstandard usage.” Photo by Winn Fuqua Photography
" />
Bryan Garner: “A question that every legal writer should ask is: ‘When will clarity come?’” Photograph by Winn Fuqua Photography.
" />
Bryan Garner: “Lawyers are constantly creating definitions, seemingly to a greater extent as time goes by.” Photograph by Winn Fuqua Photography.
" />
