Results 1 to 10 of 10
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • English
      • Home Country:
      • Canada
      • Current Location:
      • Switzerland

    • Join Date: Aug 2009
    • Posts: 1,676
    #1

    Comprehension

    I'm not sure whether the sentence below means what I think it means.

    "Whereas the latter case established the direct effect of an equal treatment provision in an Association Agreement, the former case did so with respect to a Partnership Agreement."

    Does the part starting with "the former case" make it clear that that case established the direct effect of an equal treatment provision in a Partnership Agreement? Or would one have to write: "the former case established the direct effect of such a provision in a Partnership Agreement"?

    Thanks!

  1. 5jj's Avatar
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • British English
      • Home Country:
      • England
      • Current Location:
      • Czech Republic

    • Join Date: Oct 2010
    • Posts: 28,134
    #2

    Re: Comprehension

    Quote Originally Posted by Jasmin165 View Post
    I'm not sure whether the sentence below means what I think it means.

    "Whereas the latter case established the direct effect of an equal treatment provision in an Association Agreement, the former case did so with respect to a Partnership Agreement."

    Does the part starting with "the former case" make it clear that that case established the direct effect of an equal treatment provision in a Partnership Agreement? It does Or would one have to write: "the former case established the direct effect of such a provision in a Partnership Agreement"?This is clearer.
    5

  2. Banned
    Student or Learner
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • English
      • Home Country:
      • Ireland
      • Current Location:
      • UK

    • Join Date: Jan 2011
    • Posts: 80
    #3

    Re: Comprehension

    My reply has nothing to do with your question - life 's difficult enough. I'm just wondering who writes such claptrap? I'm inclined to think EST (electro-shock-therapy) might be no bad thing if applied to those concocting this sort of mishmash, devised primarily to convulsify.

    P.S I'm referring not to your query, but to the reason responsible.

  3. 5jj's Avatar
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • British English
      • Home Country:
      • England
      • Current Location:
      • Czech Republic

    • Join Date: Oct 2010
    • Posts: 28,134
    #4

    Re: Comprehension

    Quote Originally Posted by JIM1984 View Post
    I'm just wondering who writes such claptrap?
    People who need to discuss legal cases find such language clear enough.

  4. Banned
    Student or Learner
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • English
      • Home Country:
      • Ireland
      • Current Location:
      • UK

    • Join Date: Jan 2011
    • Posts: 80
    #5

    Re: Comprehension

    Quote Originally Posted by fivejedjon View Post
    People who need to discuss legal cases find such language clear enough.
    Yes, but what about the rat-catchers of the world, what about them?

    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • English
      • Home Country:
      • Canada
      • Current Location:
      • Switzerland

    • Join Date: Aug 2009
    • Posts: 1,676
    #6

    Re: Comprehension

    Quote Originally Posted by JIM1984 View Post
    Yes, but what about the rat-catchers of the world, what about them?
    Such texts are not intended for rat-catchers. Legal writing is specialized writing. As is medical writing. Try reading a surgery report; I guarantee you won't understand much.

    Laws, on the other hand, should be written in a way that is comprehensible to the average person because people are expected to abide by them.

  5. Banned
    Student or Learner
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • English
      • Home Country:
      • Ireland
      • Current Location:
      • UK

    • Join Date: Jan 2011
    • Posts: 80
    #7

    Re: Comprehension

    Quote Originally Posted by Jasmin165 View Post
    Such texts are not intended for rat-catchers. Legal writing is specialized writing. As is medical writing. Try reading a surgery report; I guarantee you won't understand much.

    Laws, on the other hand, should be written in a way that is comprehensible to the average person because people are expected to abide by them.
    Which, if I can be so bold, rather flies in the face of legalese being something of a byword for gobbledegook.
    Last edited by JIM1984; 08-Mar-2011 at 11:25.

  6. 5jj's Avatar
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • British English
      • Home Country:
      • England
      • Current Location:
      • Czech Republic

    • Join Date: Oct 2010
    • Posts: 28,134
    #8

    Re: Comprehension

    Quote Originally Posted by JIM1984 View Post
    Which, if I can be so bold, rather flies in the face of legalese being something of a byword for gobbledegook.
    This is partly because many people with no legal training do not realise how important it is to make sure that there is no possibly of misinterpretation. Legal language is often more convoluted than most of us like because of this.

    However, there have been encouraging moves towards clearer English, and many firms now try to present their terms and conditions in more transparent, less legalistic, language. I doubt if this trend will have a great effect on the language in which laws are framed - here, precision is much more important than immediate readability.

    Let's look again at Jasmin's original example:

    "Whereas the latter case established the direct effect of an equal treatment provision in an Association Agreement, the former case did so with respect to a Partnership Agreement."

    Whereas (possibly not a word that is commonly used by all native speakers, but this single word might need three or four to replace it) the latter case ('former' and 'latter' are also not commonly used by all native speakers, but they are useful and precise words) established the direct effect of an equal treatment provision in an Association Agreement, (that seems to me to be pretty clear) the former case did so with respect to a Partnership Agreement.(perhaps the layman might find this clearer as 'the former case established the direct effect of such a provision in a Partnership Agreement' [Jasmin's suggestion] or even 'the former case established the direct effect of an equal treatment provision in a Partnership agreement', but we seem to have added quite a few words there for something that would have been clear to those to whom it was addressed)


    This is hardly 'claptrap'

  7. Banned
    Student or Learner
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • English
      • Home Country:
      • Ireland
      • Current Location:
      • UK

    • Join Date: Jan 2011
    • Posts: 80
    #9

    Re: Comprehension

    This is hardly 'claptrap'
    Insofar as Jasmin's original example and the 'calptrap'[HTML][/HTML] encouraged from yours truly, I'll admit to a knee-jerk reaction as being part responsible. When taken a little time over, the statement doesn't present itself as excessively demanding. However, there is more than a trace of that 'general legalese', and about which, in my opinion and no matter how supportively looked at, isn't a great deal beyond being a conveyancer for the most rottenness Protestantism. The type of sophistication that charts itself directly up it's own fundament!

    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • British English
      • Home Country:
      • UK
      • Current Location:
      • Laos

    • Join Date: Nov 2002
    • Posts: 57,903
    #10

    Re: Comprehension

    Legal language has to obey and follow very specific rules and patterns for a good reason. Words are not used simply to give things a gloss of sophistication. Terms used have very specific meanings and the same words and phrases are used over and over again. It may seem dense and impenetrable to an outsider, but legal documents are not meant for general readers. This does create a problem when non-specialists are expected to handle them. When non-specialists try to imitate legalese to sound more official, they often end up sounding pompous and shallow, but that does not mean that legal language is claptrap- far from it, a contract, say, drawn up by people without a grounding in law is much more likely to be claptrap. Courts and lawyers have spent centuries sifting through claptrap to try to arrive at something that can be objectively verified in a court, which is far from easy.

    The comment about rottenness Protestantism strikes me as rude- please don't make such remarks.
    Last edited by Tdol; 10-Mar-2011 at 06:58. Reason: Puritan changed to Protestantism

Similar Threads

  1. Comprehension
    By jiang in forum Ask a Teacher
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 23-Feb-2008, 02:24
  2. comprehension
    By jiang in forum Ask a Teacher
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 22-Mar-2007, 00:22
  3. Comprehension
    By jiang in forum Ask a Teacher
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 30-May-2006, 14:28
  4. Comprehension
    By jiang in forum Ask a Teacher
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 30-May-2006, 04:15
  5. Comprehension
    By jiang in forum Ask a Teacher
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 23-May-2006, 14:20

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •