Efficient language hypothesis: Difference between revisions

From The Jolly Contrarian
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 3: Line 3:
*[[Semantic code project]]
*[[Semantic code project]]
*[[Efficient market hypothesis]]
*[[Efficient market hypothesis]]
*[[A Manual of Style For the Drafting of Contracts]] — {{author|Ken Adams}}’ masterwork dedicated to the fastidious, clear, simple, plain, brisk and concise drafting and subsequent (or precedent) negotiation [[and/or]] preparation thereof of contractual and quasi-contractual obligations in written (including for the avoidance of doubt electronic) form howsoever and wheresoever described, as amended from time to time, for the time being, which time shall for the avoidance of doubt and without limitation be and be deemed to be, of the essence.
*[[A Manual of Style For the Drafting of Contracts]] — a masterwork dedicated to the fastidious, clear, simple, plain, brisk and concise drafting and subsequent (or precedent) [[negotiation]] [[and/or]] preparation thereof of contractual and quasi-contractual obligations in written (including [[for the avoidance of doubt]] electronic) form [[howsoever]] and wheresoever described, [[as amended from time to time]], [[for the time being]], which time shall for the avoidance of doubt and [[without limitation]] be and be [[deemed]] to be, [[Time is of the essence|of the essence]].
{{c|Work anthropology}}
{{c|Work anthropology}}

Revision as of 14:17, 27 September 2021

Towards more picturesque speech
SEC guidance on plain EnglishIndex: Click to expand:
Tell me more
Sign up for our newsletter — or just get in touch: for ½ a weekly 🍺 you get to consult JC. Ask about it here.

A bedfellow to the more famous efficient market hypothesis, the JC’s efficient language hypothesis states that the universally acknowledged advantages in efficiency, clarity, brevity and productivity offered by simple, clear and plain legal drafting are so compelling that sustained prolixity is impossible in commercial contracts, and all bilateral accords will eventually resolve themselves to, at most, terse bullet points rendered on a cocktail napkin, and ideally some kind of mark-up language or machine code. This, the JC goes on to conclude, must mean that the commercial world we appear to live in is just a bad dream.

See also