Download legal vocabulary

Distinctive features of
LEGAL ENGLISH
Brescia, 18.11.2016
Dr. Teresa Magno
1
LEGAL VOCABULARY
3 MAIN CATEGORIES OF LEGAL VOCABULARY

TECHNICAL TERMINOLOGY (e.g. alimony, litigation,
distraint)

SUBTECHNICAL TERMINOLOGY (e.g. service, hand)

GENERAL TERMS (e.g. witness, judge)
2
Specific features of the
vocabulary of LEGAL ENGLISH
Great degree of formality
Use of archaic and formal expression (e.g. whilst)
Compound prepositions and adverbs such as herein (in this
document) and thereafter (after that, in the future)
Words of a higher registry: to deem (to consider), expedite
(hasten), to append (to attach)
Nominalization (use of nouns instead of verbs)
Post-modification (use of modifier that follows the word or
phrase it limits or qualifies)
3
POST-MODIFICATION
1. Prepositional phrases (e.g. the boy in the blue shirt; the
house on the corner)
2. –Ing prahses (e.g. the boy talking to me)
3. Relative clauses (e.g. the woman who discovered the
corpse)
4. That clauses (e.g. there was a suggestion that evidence
had been tampered with)
5. –To infinitive phrases (e.g. He need someone to talk to)
More than one modifier (e.g. an eight-year old boy with a
gun who tried to rob a sweet shop)
4
Features of EU LEGAL
ENGLISH (1)
LEGAL VOCABULARY
1. SINGLE AND MULTI-WORD TERMS belonging to the EU legal context (e.g.
offence categories of the EAW: facilitation of unauthorized entry and residence,
forgery of means of payment, laundering of the proceeds of crime)
2.SEMI-TECHNICAL TERMS (e.g. prescription v. statute of limitations; proceeds from
crime v. products of crime)
3.LEGAL TERMINOLOGY used in both UK and EU law English (e.g. names of offences:
arson, counterfeiting, fraud, swindling)
4. GENERAL TERMS used with a specific meaning in EU legal context (e.g.
instrumentalities, mutual legal assistance)
Slightly less formal as opposed to Legal English
Mindful choice of words taking into account the draft and
translation of treaties and EU instruments into EU official languages
and, where necessary, into non-EU languages (Chinese, Arabic,
Russian)
5
Features of EU LEGAL
ENGLISH (2)
LEGAL SYNTAX
COMPLEX SENTENCES:
ARTICLE 7 OF THE DIRECTIVE ON THE RIGHT
INTERPRETATION AND TRANSLATION IN CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS on Record-keeping
TO
Member States shall ensure that when a suspected or accused person has been subject to
questioning or hearings by an investigative or judicial authority with the assistance of an
interpreter pursuant to Article 2, when an oral translation or oral summary of essential
documents has been provided in the presence of such an authority pursuant to Article 3(7),
or when a person has waived the right to translation pursuant to Article 3(8), it will be
noted that these events have occurred, using the recording procedure in accordance with
the law of the Member State concerned.
USE OF THE PASSIVE (stress on the result of the action rather than on the agents)
VERB TENSES:
PRESENT SIMPLE (events happening now or regularly), PRESENT PERFECT,
PRESENT CONTINUOUS (an event happening in this moment; used to report on future,
planned events), PAST SIMPLE.
VERBS OF ENACTING:
NEGATIVE OBLIGATION
auxiliary verb SHALL for POSITIVE OBLIGATION, SHALL NOT for
Art.4 of the Legal Aid directive: Member States shall ensure that suspects and accused
persons who lack sufficient resources to pay for the assistance of a lawyer have the right to
legal aid when the interests of justice so require
VERBS USED FOR DEFINING OR CREATING OR DEVELOPING
6
Features of EU LEGAL
ENGLISH (3)
COUNCIL FRAMEWORK DECISION 2009/948/JHA of 30
November 2009 on prevention and settlement of conflicts of
exercise of jurisdiction in criminal proceedings
Article 2
Subject matter and scope
1. With a view to achieving the objective set out in Article 1, this
Framework Decision establishes a framework on: (a) a procedure
for establishing contact between the competent authorities of
Member States, with a view to confirming the existence of
parallel criminal proceedings in respect of the same facts
involving the same person; (b) the exchange of information,
through direct consultations, between the competent authorities of
two or more Member States conducting parallel criminal
proceedings in respect of the same facts involving the same
person, in case they already have knowledge of the existence of
parallel criminal proceedings, with a view to reaching consensus
on any effective solution aimed at avoiding the adverse
consequences arising from such parallel proceedings.
7
Thanks for
your kind attention
8