You are viewing a single comment's thread. View all
2
disoriented on scored.co
8 days ago2 points(+0/-0/+2Score on mirror)
In the early 1990's I attended a participants' workshop for a Renaissance Faire in Southern California. This particular class was the basics of Elizabethan speech taught by a lawyer who compared legalese was very formulaic and contained a lot of centuries-old verbiage that just carried over each time it was used. The thinking by lawyers was "well it worked last time, so just go with whatever works". It had nothing to do with exactitude in meaning and was more like a magic spell that had to be recited exactly or else it wouldn't work.
I think he was on to something there. It's a valid observation. Very often, submissions to a judge have less to do with actual reasoning and more to do with the language they use. If the language strays too much from what is familiar, it will be rejected.
One should keep in mind that jews were not involved in English law until the 1700, so English law and its legal language were developed well before the influence by jews.
English law and English courts are largely ceremony and the projection of authority and power over a population who are subjects of the crown and only have rights that are given to them by the crown or parliament.
I think he was on to something there. It's a valid observation. Very often, submissions to a judge have less to do with actual reasoning and more to do with the language they use. If the language strays too much from what is familiar, it will be rejected.
One should keep in mind that jews were not involved in English law until the 1700, so English law and its legal language were developed well before the influence by jews.
English law and English courts are largely ceremony and the projection of authority and power over a population who are subjects of the crown and only have rights that are given to them by the crown or parliament.