Can the Law Speak Directly to its Subjects? The Limitation of Plain Language
Can the Law Speak Directly to its Subjects? The Limitation of Plain Language
复制标题
DOI：
10.1111/j.1467-6478.2011.00549.x
复制
发表时间：
2011-09-01
影响因子：
1.3
通讯作者：
Assy, Rabeea
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Assy, Rabeea
我们能否免除律师作为法律与其主体之间的中间人？外行人能直接接触法律吗？简明英语运动（PEM）长期以来一直提倡在法律的写作中使用简明语言，以消除法律的神秘性，许多政府和私营公司已经花费了大量资源来起草简明语言的立法和法律的文件。本文认为，PEM夸大了能力，使法律明白易懂的非律师，模糊了更深层次的问题，法律的复杂性，只关注语言和风格。有效地使用法律需要的专业知识远远超出了理解用于传达它的词语的含义：法律的某些复杂方面不能仅仅通过简化语言来消除，本文表明，除了渗透技术语言的能力之外，还需要其他专业技能。诉讼就是这种技能的典型例证。
Can we dispense with lawyers as intermediaries between the law and its subjects? Can laypeople have direct access to the law? The Plain English Movement (PEM) has long promoted the use of plain language in legal writing as the way to demystify the law, and many governments and private corporations have expended significant resources on drafting legislation and legal documents in plain language. This article argues that the PEM has exaggerated the capacity of plain language to render the law intelligible to the non-lawyer, obscuring the deeper question of legal complexity by focusing solely on language and style. Using the law effectively requires expertise that goes far beyond understanding the meaning of the words used to communicate it: certain complex aspects of the law cannot be eliminated by mere simplification of language and this article demonstrates that other specialized skills are required over and above the ability to penetrate technical language. The paradigmatic illustration of the need for such skills is litigation.