Legal English is known as a complex language system characterized by the use of formal terminology, complex syntax and a complicated style of writing. However, over the last 40 years legal English has been undergoing reforms which were initiated by the proponents of the Plain English Campaign. The main goal of this movement has been to simplify legal language, in particular the language of legal acts, for the purpose of making it equally comprehensible to both legal experts and ordinary citizens. This paper gives a brief overview of the most significant reforms that have taken place in the sphere of verb phrase focusing on the „deletion“ of the modal shall and the reduction of passive sentences, which are nowadays considered widely recognized rules in the drafting of not only British but also legal acts of all the English-speaking jurisdictions.
Keywords: Plain English Campaign, verb phrase, legal acts, reform, shall, passive voice
References
1.
Office of the Scottish Parliamentary Counsel.
2.
Williams C. Fuzziness in legal English: what shall we do with “shall”? U: Wagner A. In: Legal Language and the Search for Clarity. p. 237–63.
3.
Williams C. Changes in the verb phrase in legislative language in English. The Verb Phrase in English. 2013. p. 353–71.
4.
Williams C. Tradition and Change in Legal English: Verbal Constructions in Prescriptive Texts.
5.
Williams C. Legal English and the ‘modal revolution.’ Modality in English. 2009. p. 199–210.
6.
Government A. Office of Parliamentary Counsel.
7.
Clarity. Dostupno na.
8.
Cooper KP. Is there a case for the abolition of ‘shall’ from EU legislation? RGSL Research Papers. 1.
9.
Revenue HM, Customs. Consultation papers, Exposure Drafts and Response Documents.
10.
Trosborg A. Statutes and contracts: An analysis of legal speech acts in the English language of the law. Journal of Pragmatics. 1995;23(1):31–53.
11.
Everitt S. Legislation map. BSAVA Companion. 2014;2014(8):4–7.
12.
Government NZ. Parliamentary Counsel Office.
13.
Commission PL.
14.
U.K. Office of the Parliamentary Counsel.
15.
Act UKI.
16.
Act UKCA.
17.
Wydick RC. Plain English for Lawyers. California Law Review. 1978;66(4):727.
18.
Asprey M. Shall Must Go. Scribes Journal of Legal Writing. 3:61–79.
19.
Sullivan R. The Promise of Plain Language Drafting. McGill Law Journal. :97–128.
20.
Shall. Drafting Technique Group Paper 19.
21.
Schneidereit G. Legal Language as a Special Language: Structural Features of English Legal Language.
22.
Maley Y. The language of the law.
23.
Kimble J. The Many Misuses of ‘Shall.’ The Scribes Journal of Legal Writing. 3:61–4.
24.
Ingles BM. Legal English Communication Skills.
25.
Hunt B. Plain Language in Legislative Drafting: Is it Really the Answer? Statute Law Review. 2002;23(1):24–46.
26.
Haigh R. Legal English.
27.
Garner B. A Dictionary of Modern Legal Usage.
28.
Cutts M. The Plain English Guide.
29.
Cutts M i M, C. Writing Plain English.
30.
Crabbe VCRAC. Legislative Drafting.
31.
Crystal D. The Cambridge Encyclopaedia of the English Language.
32.
Butt P i C, R. Modern Legal Drafting: A Guide to Using Clearer Language.
The statements, opinions and data contained in the journal are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publisher and the editor(s). We stay neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
