Shall constitute: Difference between revisions

Latest revision as of 13:46, 15 November 2022

The JC’s guide to writing nice.™

Index: Click ᐅ to expand: Plain English Drafting

Comments? Questions? Suggestions? Requests? Insults? We’d love to 📧 hear from you. Sign up for our newsletter.

I think, therefore I shall be deemed to be constituted.
—René Descartes, Discourse on the Legal Method (1683)

A legal eagle-approved way of saying “is”.

“Shall constitute” scores over “be” in that it is highly regular, and the different forms in a given tense require no conjugation:

But this is because you bolted it to shall, a modal verb. That is no reason to favour it. It is the most violent offender against the mores of plain English.

“Be” is the citadel; it sits on a velvet cushion in the most heavily fortified dungeon of the castle’s keep. There is no plainer word than be. It is the first word a non-English speaker learns on her long journey to being culturally hegemonised. There is no-one — not the dullest first grade student, who doesn’t understand profoundly what it means.

“Constitute” adds nothing to “be”. It is no more specific, no more precise, there is no nuance of meaning it captures that “be” does not. It just sounds cleverer.

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-A legal way of saying "is". It scores over [[to be]] in that it is highly regular: the different forms require no conjugation:
+{{a|drafting|}}{{Quote|I think, therefore I shall be deemed to be constituted.
+:—[[René Descartes]], ''Discourse on the Legal Method'' (1683)}}
-I shall constitute   |  I ''am''<br>
+A [[Legal eagle|legal eagle-approved]] way of saying “is”.
-You shall constitute  |  You ''are'' <br>
-He, she or it shall constitute  /  He, she or it ''is'' <br>
-We shall constitute  |   we ''are'' <br>
-You shall constitute  |  You ''are''<br>
-They shall constitute |  They ''are''<br>
-On the other hand it suffers from sounding quite pompous and rather dim.
+“Shall [[constitute]]” scores over “[[be]]” in that it is highly ''regular'', and the different forms in a given tense require no [[conjugation]]:
+I ''shall constitute''   |  I ''am''<br>
+You ''shall constitute''   |  You ''are'' <br>
+He, she or it ''shall constitute''   |  He, she or it ''is'' <br>
+We ''shall constitute''   |   we ''are'' <br>
+You ''shall constitute''   |  You ''are''<br>
+They ''shall constitute''   |  They ''are''<br>
+But this is because you bolted it to shall, a modal verb. That is no reason to favour it. It is ''the  most violent offender against the mores of plain English.
+“Be” is the citadel; it sits on a velvet cushion in the most heavily fortified dungeon of the castle’s keep. There is ''no'' plainer word than ''be''. It is the first word a non-English speaker learns on her long journey to being culturally hegemonised. There is no-one — not the dullest first grade student, who doesn’t understand profoundly what it means.
+“Constitute” adds nothing to “be”. It is no more specific, no more precise, there is no nuance of meaning it captures that “be” does not. It just sounds cleverer.

Shall constitute: Difference between revisions

Latest revision as of 13:46, 15 November 2022

Navigation menu

Search