Our Carnegie library was a dignified brick edifice built for $6,000. It was an oasis for knowledge, not some bogus den of “literary filth” that today’s shortsighted cynics might pretend.
In many ways, the new legal vocabulary reflects the time in which we live. As you look through the terms that have arisen over the last 24 years, you’ll see much of our recent history.
Discussions have their limits, conversations their constraints, and when it comes to bettering mental health in the legal profession, the ratio of words to actions is often quite lopsided. There are, however, notable exceptions.
The tough thing about English isn’t grammar so much as word choice. There are so many homophones, or words that sound the same but mean completely different things and may be spelled differently. Let’s see whether you’d have made the right choice. If you’ve read a lot over the years and paid attention, you’ll do well here. Most of the choices don’t involve true homophones but instead similar-sounding words.
“As dedicated as I was to my work, I was more determined to stay alive. Something had to give, but in truth, it wasn’t just one thing—I had to change almost everything,” writes Andrea “Lee” Negroni, an adjunct professor at the American University Washington College of Law.
“For some, it’s probably better to know little to nothing of English usage,” writes Bryan Garner. “They’ll be happy. Ineffectual, but happy. When teaching lawyers, one technique I use is to see whether the participants recognize good writing when they see it.”
Lawyers have an ethical duty to prepare clients and witnesses before hearings and testimony, but they may not cross the line into manipulating testimony or engaging in improper coaching—a problem exacerbated during the pandemic by the rise in remote court proceedings.
“When I interviewed for a summer associate position with some of Seattle’s biggest firms, … I aimed for a firm with the people and culture I thought would help me understand what it meant to be an attorney for the biggest companies in the world. Five years later, those same people would help me face the biggest challenge of my life and a new set of terrifying letters: ALS (amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, better known as Lou Gehrig’s disease).”
There are many obstacles to clarity: fuzzy thinking, wordiness, abstractness, inept phrasing and plain dullness. It’s often said that an unclear mind cannot produce clear prose. That’s true enough. But the very techniques of good writing can reinforce clear thinking. The more lucidly you write, the more sharply your ideas will come into focus, both for your readers and yourself.
A sacrosanct concept in law is the attorney-client privilege—that a client can speak to his or her attorney knowing full well that what the client says will be kept secret. The evidentiary privilege ensures free and frank communications between attorney and client, a reality that generally serves the public interest.
“I have been a practicing lawyer since 1988, and I’m acutely aware of the curious dance that attorneys have with how to be addressed professionally, particularly in academic settings. It never occurred to me, however, that lawyers would use the title “Dr.” until a few years after graduating from law school.”
It’s fascinating to monitor how American courts interpret legal instruments. Do they go by the words, or do they let other considerations influence their decisions? That is to say, are they textualists or nontextualists? Regardless of how you see the merits of that issue, you might try your hand at these problems that American courts have decided since 2017.
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.
