You do not have permission to edit this page, for the following reasons:

This IP address has been blocked from editing Wikipedia.
This does not affect your ability to read Wikipedia pages.
Most people who see this message have done nothing wrong. Some kinds of blocks restrict editing from specific service providers or telecom companies in response to recent abuse or vandalism, and can sometimes affect other users who are unrelated to that abuse. Review the information below for assistance if you do not believe that you have done anything wrong.

The IP address or range 35.170.0.0/16 has been blocked (disabled) by ‪JJMC89‬ for the following reason(s):

The IP address that you are currently using has been blocked because it is believed to be a web host provider or colocation provider. To prevent abuse, web hosts and colocation providers may be blocked from editing Wikipedia.
You will not be able to edit Wikipedia using a web host or colocation provider because it hides your IP address, much like a proxy or VPN.
We recommend that you attempt to use another connection to edit. For example, if you use a proxy or VPN to connect to the internet, turn it off when editing Wikipedia. If you edit using a mobile connection, try using a Wi-Fi connection, and vice versa. If you are using a corporate internet connection, switch to a different Wi-Fi network. If you have a Wikipedia account, please log in.
If you do not have any other way to edit Wikipedia, you will need to request an IP block exemption.

How to appeal if you are confident that your connection does not use a colocation provider's IP address:
If you are confident that you are not using a web host, you may appeal this block by adding the following text on your talk page: ((unblock|reason=Caught by a colocation web host block but this host or IP is not a web host. My IP address is _______. Place any further information here. ~~~~)). You must fill in the blank with your IP address for this block to be investigated. Your IP address can be determined here. Alternatively, if you wish to keep your IP address private you can use the unblock ticket request system. There are several reasons you might be editing using the IP address of a web host or colocation provider (such as if you are using VPN software or a business network); please use this method of appeal only if you think your IP address is in fact not a web host or colocation provider.

Administrators: The IP block exemption user right should only be applied to allow users to edit using web host in exceptional circumstances, and requests should usually be directed to the functionaries team via email. If you intend to give the IPBE user right, a CheckUser needs to take a look at the account. This can be requested most easily at SPI Quick Checkuser Requests. Unblocking an IP or IP range with this template is highly discouraged without at least contacting the blocking administrator.

This block will expire on 05:20, 2 July 2025.

Even when blocked, you will usually still be able to edit your user talk page, as well as email administrators and other editors.

For information on how to proceed, please read the FAQ for blocked users and the guideline on block appeals. The guide to appealing blocks may also be helpful.

Other useful links: Blocking policy · Help:I have been blocked
Your IP address is in a range that has been blocked on all Wikimedia Foundation wikis. The block was made by ‪Jon Kolbert‬. The reason given is Open proxy/Webhost: See the help page if you are affected .
- Start of block: 05:38, 21 February 2024
- Expiry of block: 05:38, 21 February 2029
Your current IP address is 35.170.198.190. The blocked range is 35.170.0.0/16. Please include all above details in any queries you make. If you believe you were blocked by mistake, you can find additional information and instructions in the No open proxies global policy. Otherwise, to discuss the block please post a request for review on Meta-Wiki. You could also send an email to the stewards VRT queue at stewards@wikimedia.org including all above details.

You can view and copy the source of this page:

((Short description|English as used in legal matters))
((distinguish|text=English legal terms or concepts, e.g., [[English law]]; see also [[English Law (disambiguation)]]))
((Multiple issues|
((More citations needed|date=July 2011))
((More footnotes needed|date=October 2011))
))

'''Legal English''' is a [[Register_(sociolinguistics)|register]] of [[English language|English]] used in [[legal writing]]. It differs from day-to-day spoken English in a variety of ways including the use of specialized vocabulary, syntactic constructions, and set phrases such as [[legal doublet]]s.

Legal English has traditionally been the preserve of lawyers from [[List of countries where English is an official language|English-speaking countries]] (especially the U.S., the [[United Kingdom|UK]], Ireland, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Kenya, and South Africa) which have shared common law traditions. However, due to the spread of Legal English as the predominant language of [[international business]], as well as its role as a legal language within the [[European Union]], Legal English is now a global [[phenomenon]].

==Historical development==
In [[prehistoric Britain]], traditional common law was discussed in the vernacular (see [[Celtic law]]). The legal language and legal tradition changed with waves of conquerors over the following centuries. [[Roman Britain]] (after the [[Roman conquest of Britain|conquest]] beginning in AD 43) followed Roman legal tradition, and its legal language was Latin. Following the [[End of Roman rule in Britain|Roman departure from Britain]] circa 410 and the [[Anglo-Saxon invasion of Britain]], the dominant tradition was instead [[Anglo-Saxon law]], which was discussed in the Germanic vernacular ([[Old English]]), and written in Old English since circa 600, beginning with the [[Law of Æthelberht]]. Following the [[Norman conquest of England|Norman invasion of England in 1066]], [[Anglo-Norman language|Anglo-Norman French]] became the official language of legal proceedings in England for a period of nearly 300 years until the [[Pleading in English Act 1362]] (and continued in minor use for another 300 years), while [[Medieval Latin]] was used for written records for over 650 years. Some English technical terms were retained, however (see [[Anglo-Saxon law#Language and dialect|Anglo-Saxon law: Language and dialect]] for details).

In legal pleadings, Anglo-Norman developed into [[Law French]], from which many words in modern legal English are derived. These include ''property'', ''estate'', ''chattel'', ''lease'', ''executor'', and ''tenant''. The use of Law French during this period had an enduring influence on the general [[Register (sociolinguistics)|linguistic register]] of modern legal English. That use also accounts for some of the complex linguistic structures used in legal writing. In 1362, the [[Statute of Pleading]] was enacted, which stated that all legal proceedings should be conducted in English (but recorded in Latin). This marked the beginning of formal Legal English; Law French continued to be used in some forms into the 17th century, although Law French became increasingly degenerate.

From 1066, [[Latin]] was the language of formal records and [[statutes]], and was replaced by English in the [[Proceedings in Courts of Justice Act 1730]]. However, because only the highly-educated were fluent in Latin, it never became the language of legal pleading or debate. The influence of Latin can be seen in a number of words and phrases such as ''[[ad hoc]]'', ''[[de facto]]'', ''[[de jure]]'', ''[[bona fide]]'', ''inter alia'', and ''[[ultra vires]],'' which remain in current use in legal writing (see [[Legal Latin]]).

===Style===
In 2004, [[David Crystal]] proposed a stylistic influence upon English legal language. During the [[medieval]] period, lawyers used a mixture of [[Latin]], [[Anglo-Norman language|French]] and English. To avoid ambiguity, lawyers often offered [[legal doublet|pairs of words]] from different languages. Sometimes there was little ambiguity to resolve and the pairs merely gave greater emphasis, becoming a stylistic habit. This is a feature of legal style that continues to the present day. Examples of mixed language doublets are: "breaking and entering" (English/French), "fit and proper" (English/French), "lands and tenements" (English/French), and "will and testament" (English/Latin). Examples of English-only doublets are "let and hindrance" and "have and hold".

Modern English vocabulary draws significantly from Germanic languages, French, and Latin, the lattermost often by way of French. These vocabularies are used preferentially in different registers, with words of French origin being more formal than those of Germanic origin, and words of Latin origin being more formal than those of French origin. Thus, the extensive use of French and Latin words in Legal English results in a relatively formal style.

Further, legal English is useful for its dramatic effect: for example, a [[subpoena]] compelling a witness to appear in court often ends with the archaic threat "Fail not, at your peril"; the "peril" is not described (being arrested and held in [[contempt of court]]) but the formality of the language tends to have a stronger effect on the recipient of the subpoena than a simple statement like "We can arrest you if you don't show up".

Whereas legal language in the medieval period combined Latin, French, and English to avoid ambiguity. According to Walter Probert, judicial lawyers, roughly starting in the twentieth century, often manipulate the language to be more persuasive of their campaign ideals.<ref>((Cite journal |last=Probert |first=Walter |date=1959 |title=Law and Persuasion: The Language Behavior of Lawyers |url=https://scholarship.law.upenn.edu/penn_law_review/vol108/iss1/2 |journal=University of Pennsylvania Law Review |volume=108 |issue=1 |pages=35–58|doi=10.2307/3310330 |jstor=3310330 ))</ref>

==Key features==
((Original research|section|date=March 2011))
As noted above, legal English differs greatly from standard English in a number of ways. The most important of these differences are as follows:

* Use of [[Technical terminology|terms of art]]. Legal English, in common with the language used by other trades and professions, employs a great deal of technical terminology which is unfamiliar to the [[layman]] (e.g. ''[[waiver]], [[restraint of trade]], [[restrictive covenant]], [[Estoppel|promissory estoppel]]''). Much of this vocabulary is derived from French and Latin.
* These terms of art include ordinary words used with special meanings. For example, the familiar term ''[[consideration]]'' refers, in legal English, to [[contract]]s and means ''an act, forbearance or promise by one party to a contract that constitutes the price for which the promise of the other party is bought'' (Oxford Dictionary of Law). Other examples are ''construction, prefer, redemption, furnish, hold,'' and ''find''.
* Lack of [[punctuation]]. Old legal documents sometimes omitted all punctution. In England, this arose from the perception that the meaning of legal documents should be contained only in the words used, and that punctuation created ambiguity. Another reason was the concern that punctuation could be added undetectably to a document after it came into effect and so alter its meaning. Therefore, the presence of punctuation could be used to detect any tampering with the original document. Punctuation is commonly used in modern legal drafting to clarify the [[meaning (linguistics)|meaning]] of any particular sentence.<ref>((Cite book |last1=Butt |first1=Peter |title=Modern Legal Drafting: A Guide to Using Clearer Language |last2=Castle |first2=Richard |date=2001 |publisher=Cambridge University Press |isbn=0-521-00186-2 |pages=139–140))</ref>
* Use of [[Legal doublet|doublets and triplets]]. The mix of languages used in early legalese led to the tendency in legal English to string together two or three words to convey a single legal concept. Examples are ''null and void'', ''fit and proper'', ''(due) care and attention'', ''perform and discharge'', ''terms and conditions'', ''controversy or claim'', ''promise, agree and covenant'' and ''cease and desist''. While originally being done to help all lawyers regardless of the language they spoke (English, French, or Latin), it now often joins words with identical meanings.
* Unusual [[word order]]. There is a noticeable difference in the word order used compared to standard English. For example, ''the provisions for termination hereinafter appearing'' or ''will at the cost of the borrower forthwith comply with the same''.
* Use of unfamiliar [[pro-form]]s. For example, ''the same, the said, the aforementioned'' etc. The use of the terms often do not replace the noun but are used as adjectives to modify the noun. For example, ''the said John Smith''.
* Use of [[pronominal adverbs]]. Words like ''hereof, thereof,'' and ''whereof'' (and further derivatives, including ''-at, -in, -after, -before, -with, -by, -above, -on, -upon'') are not often used in standard English. Their use in legal English is primarily to avoid repeating names or phrases, such as ''the parties hereto'' instead of ''the parties to this contract''.
* ''-er, -or,'' and ''-ee'' name endings. Legal English contains some words and titles, such as employer and employee; lessor and lessee, in which the reciprocal and opposite nature of the relationship is indicated by the use of alternative endings.
* Use of [[phrasal verbs]]. Phrasal verbs play a large role in legal English and are often used in a quasi-technical sense, such as ''parties '''enter into''' contracts, '''put down''' deposits, '''serve''''' [documents] '''''upon''' other parties, '''write off''' debts, '''attend at''' locations'', and so on.
* Operation within a specific disciplinary value system delimited by professional, epistemological and pragmatic concerns (use of ''reasonable'', ''proper'', ''clear'', ''appropriate'', etc.).<ref>((Cite journal |last=Breeze |first=Ruth |date=2011 |title=Disciplinary Values in Legal Discourse: A Corpus Study |url=https://revistaiberica.org/index.php/iberica/article/view/330 |journal=Ibérica |language=en |issue=21 |pages=93–115))</ref>

==Education==
((More citations needed|date=June 2007))
Because of the prevalence of the English language in international business relations, as well as, its role as a legal language globally, a feeling has existed for a long period in the international legal community that traditional English language training is not sufficient to meet lawyers’ English language requirements. The main reason for this is that such training generally ignores the ways in which English usage may be modified by the particular demands of legal practice – and by the conventions of legal English as a separate branch of English in itself.

As a result, non-native English speaking legal professionals and law students increasingly seek specialist training in legal English, and such training is now provided by law schools, language centres,<ref>((Cite web |title=Cambridge Law Studio |url=http://www.cambridgelawstudio.co.uk/ |access-date=2017-10-17 |language=en))</ref> private firms and podcasts<ref>((Cite web |title=Study Legal English |url=https://studylegalenglish.com/ |access-date=2017-10-17 |language=en))</ref> that focus on legal language. The UK [[TOLES]] examination was set up to teach legal English to non-native English speakers. The exams focus on the aspects of legal English noted as lacking by lawyers.<ref>((Cite web |title=TOLES and other Legal English Exams |url=http://www.toles.co.uk/pages/toles-and-other-legal-english-exams.php |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120216110152/http://www.toles.co.uk/pages/toles-and-other-legal-english-exams.php |archive-date=16 February 2012 |access-date=5 April 2015 |website=TOLES))</ref> An annual [[Global Legal Skills Conference]] was also established as a forum for professors of Legal English and other skills professionals to exchange information on teaching methods and materials.<ref>((Cite web |title=Global Legal Skills Conference |url=http://glsc.jmls.edu/2016 |url-status=dead |access-date=2016-03-28 |archive-date=2016-03-10 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160310234727/http://glsc.jmls.edu/2016/ ))</ref>

==See also==
* [[Form book]]
* [[International Legal English Certificate]]
* [[Legal doublet]]
* [[Legal writing]]
* [[Nomenclature]]
* [[Plain Writing Act of 2010]]

==References==

===Footnotes===
((reflist|30em))

===References===
((refbegin))
* Bain Butler, D. (2013). ''Strategies for clarity in legal writing''. Clarity 70. New York: Aspen Publishers. 
* Bain Butler, D. (2015). ''Developing international EFL/ESL scholarly writers''.
* Bhatia, V. K. (1993). ''Analyzing genre: Language in professional settings''. London: Longman.
* Goddard, C. (2010). “Didactic aspects of legal English: Dynamics of course preparation”, in ''ESP across cultures'', Special issue: ''Legal English across cultures'', eds. M. Gotti & C. Williams, vol. 7, 45-62.
* Oates, L. & Enquist, A. (2009). ''Just writing: Grammar, punctuation, and style for the legal writer'', rev. edn. New York, NY: Aspen Publishers.
* Ramsfield, J. (2005). ''Culture to culture: A guide to U.S. legal writing''. Durham, NC: Carolina Academic Press.
* Tiersma, Peter M. (1999), ''Legal language''. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
* Wydick, R. (2005b). ''Plain English for lawyers: Teacher's manual'', 5th edn. Durham, NC: Carolina Academic Press.
((refend))

==Further reading==
* Mark Adler's ''Clarity for Lawyers'' (2nd edn, The Law Society, 2006).
* Peter Butt and Richard Castle's ''Modern Legal Drafting''.
* [[David Crystal]]'s ''The Stories of English'' (Penguin Books, 2004), Part 7.4.
* Howard Darmstadter's Precision's Counterfeit: The Failures of Complex Documents, and Some Suggested Remedies ''The Business Lawyer'' (American Bar Association, 2010). ((JSTOR|25758526))
* Maria Fraddosio, ''New ELS: English for Law Students'' (Naples, Edizioni Giuridiche Simone, 2008).
* Bryan Garner's ''Dictionary of Modern Legal Usage'' (Oxford University Press).
* Helen Gubby. ''English legal terminology: legal concepts in language'', 4th edn. The Hague: Eleven International Publishing, 2016.
* Daniel R. White's ''((em|Still)) The Official Lawyer's Handbook'' (NY: Plume/Penguin 1991), Chapter 13, pp.&nbsp;171–176,
* ''Trials and Tribulations—An Anthology of Appealing Legal Humor'', edited by Daniel R. White (NY: Plume/Penguin 1991), p.&nbsp;241.
* Walter Probert. "Law and Persuasion: The Language-Behavior of Lawyers", ''University of Pennsylvania Law Review'', vol. 108, no. 1, 1959, pp.&nbsp;35–58.  ((JSTOR|3310330))

==External links==
((wikt|legalese))
*[http://clarity.shuttlepod.org/Resources/Documents/Clarity%2070..pdf Strategies for clarity in legal writing], Clarity 70, p.&nbsp;31
* M Pasternak, C Rico, "[http://www.uakron.edu/law/lawreview/taxjournal/atj23/docs/Pasternak08.pdf Tax Interpretation, Planning, and Avoidance: Some Linguistic Analysis]", 23 Akron Tax Journal, 33 (2008).
* The ''[https://web.archive.org/web/20021201115558/http://www.forum-legal.com/docubase.htm oxford Oxford Handbook of Legal Correspondence]'' (2006) by Rupert Haigh and published by Oxford University Press.
* "[https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/styleguide_english_dgt_en.pdf English Style Guide]" for the European Commission.
<!-- * [http://www.swisslegalenglish.com/ ''Swiss Legal English Dictionary'']. -->
* A [https://legalese.com programming language] to generate legal English from code.
* [http://www.esptodayjournal.org/pdf/current_issue/2015/3.%20RUTH%20BREEZE%20-%20full%20text.pdf Teaching legal English vocabulary]. Ruth Breeze (ESP Today, 2015).

[[Category:English-language education]]
[[Category:Legal communication]]
[[Category:English legal terminology]]
[[Category:English for specific purposes]]
[[Category:Dialects of English]]

Pages transcluded onto the current version of this page (help):

Legal English (edit)
Template:Ambox (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Cite book (view source) (protected)
Template:Cite journal (view source) (protected)
Template:Cite web (view source) (protected)
Template:Distinguish (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Em (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Find sources mainspace (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:JSTOR (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Main other (view source) (protected)
Template:More citations needed (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:More footnotes needed (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Multiple issues (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Multiple issues/styles.css (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Original research (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Pagetype (view source) (protected)
Template:Plainlist/styles.css (view source) (protected)
Template:Refbegin (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Refbegin/styles.css (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Refend (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Reflist (view source) (protected)
Template:Reflist/styles.css (view source) (protected)
Template:SDcat (view source) (protected)
Template:Short description (view source) (protected)
Template:Short description/lowercasecheck (view source) (protected)
Template:Side box (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Sister project (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Wikt (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Wiktionary (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Yesno (view source) (protected)
Template:Yesno-no (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Arguments (view source) (protected)
Module:Category handler (view source) (protected)
Module:Category handler/blacklist (view source) (protected)
Module:Category handler/config (view source) (protected)
Module:Category handler/data (view source) (protected)
Module:Category handler/shared (view source) (protected)
Module:Check for unknown parameters (view source) (protected)
Module:Citation/CS1 (view source) (protected)
Module:Citation/CS1/COinS (view source) (protected)
Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration (view source) (protected)
Module:Citation/CS1/Date validation (view source) (protected)
Module:Citation/CS1/Identifiers (view source) (protected)
Module:Citation/CS1/Utilities (view source) (protected)
Module:Citation/CS1/Whitelist (view source) (protected)
Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css (view source) (protected)
Module:Disambiguation/templates (view source) (protected)
Module:Distinguish (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Find sources (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Find sources/config (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Find sources/links (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Find sources/templates/Find sources mainspace (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Format link (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Hatnote (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Hatnote/styles.css (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Hatnote list (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Message box (view source) (protected)
Module:Message box/ambox.css (view source) (protected)
Module:Message box/configuration (view source) (protected)
Module:Namespace detect/config (view source) (protected)
Module:Namespace detect/data (view source) (protected)
Module:Pagetype (view source) (protected)
Module:Pagetype/config (view source) (protected)
Module:Pagetype/disambiguation (view source) (protected)
Module:Pagetype/setindex (view source) (protected)
Module:Pagetype/softredirect (view source) (protected)
Module:SDcat (view source) (protected)
Module:Side box (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Side box/styles.css (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:String (view source) (protected)
Module:TableTools (view source) (protected)
Module:Unsubst (view source) (protected)
Module:Wikitext Parsing (view source) (protected)
Module:Yesno (view source) (protected)

Return to Legal English.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_English"