Plain English - Why Not: Difference between revisions
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
For every lawyer likes to [[add value]]. She ''needs'' to, to justify that hefty fee. So looking at a draft and saying, “don’t sweat it, client, it’s fine” hardly passes muster. | For every lawyer likes to [[add value]]. She ''needs'' to, to justify that hefty fee. So looking at a draft and saying, “don’t sweat it, client, it’s fine” hardly passes muster. | ||
{{ | {{sa}} | ||
*[[anal paradox]] | *[[anal paradox]] | ||
{{plainenglish}} | {{plainenglish}} | ||
Revision as of 11:36, 18 January 2020
Some say that lawyers deliberately avoid writing clearly: legalese protects their privileged position, keeping non-specialist challengers out, and bamboozling their customers into believing they need legal advice to progress the simplest commercial opportunites.
But it's more complicated than that. True, some practitioners don’t use plain English because they can’t. But for most, legalese arises as an unwanted by product of advising and negotiating legal agreements.
For every lawyer likes to add value. She needs to, to justify that hefty fee. So looking at a draft and saying, “don’t sweat it, client, it’s fine” hardly passes muster.
See also
Plain English Anatomy™
Noun | Verb | Adjective | Adverb | Preposition | Conjunction | Latin | Germany | Flannel | Legal triplicate | Nominalisation | Murder your darlings