As what Lintao (2015) asserts, “the prominent role of language as the heart of the law can never be underestimated” (p. 1).Ĭonsiderably, the legal language is dominated by repetitions, archaic words and phrases, technical terms, binomial and multinomial expressions, long sentences containing several clauses, unusual propositional phrases and the use of nominalization. The law itself would be meaningless without language it largely depends on language. It must then be emphasized that language plays a very important role in the field of law. Correspondingly, in admitting that the law profession is the most word-replete next to journalism, Cruz and Quiason (2001) recognize the heavy demands expected from law practitioners about the use of the oral and written language in the legal profession. The general features of the legal language and the development and changes it underwent over time discourse and pragmatic analyses comprehensibility and simplification are just some of the studies conducted about the interconnection between language and the law. Various authors ( Butt and Castle 2006 Coulthard and Johnson 2007 De Groot 1998 Garner 1986, 2002, 2011 Haigh 2004 Hiltunen 1990 Solan 1993 Tiersma 1999, 2008 Williams 2004 Schane 2006 Stanojević 2011) have explored about the relationship between language and law. More importantly, two central findings of this study have uncovered the differences on the rules and at the same time the overwhelming number of incorrect shall uses, resulting in misunderstanding of the contracts, as reflected in a number of Philippine legal cases filed in court. Conveying deontic values in English and Italian contracts: A cross-cultural analysis. Results reveal the concurrence or likeness in the use of modals of these contracts vis-a-vis the local codified laws and in a number of contracts in other countries ( Bondi and Diani, 2010. USA: Aspen Publishers) construct on the correct usage of shall in contracts served as frameworks of this study. Comparative Legilinguistics 75–92) work on the three deontic meanings of obligation, permission and prohibition and Stark’s ( 2007, Drafting contracts – How and why lawyers do what they do. In examining deontic meanings, this work attempted to address the following questions: 1) What modals/non-modals are employed in expressing the meanings of obligation, permission and prohibition in selected Philippine contracts? 2) How is the modal shall utilized in the given contracts? Matulewska’s ( 2010, Deontic modality and modals in the language of contracts. This study addressed how contractual modalities are interpreted in the Philippine context and investigated how the most commonly misused modal shall is employed in different Philippine contracts. Contract drafting entails a specialized work that a legal drafter must be able to write assessable and comprehensible contracts. A considerable body of literature, various empirical studies and actual Philippine court cases put forward how deontic uses in legal documents such as contracts can bring about issues and confusion leading to comprehension problems. A type of modality that is very much visible in contracts is the deontic modality.
Modality, from the cognitive linguists’ perspective, relates to a “speaker’s assessment of, or attitude towards, the potentiality of a state of affairs” ( Radden and Dirven, 2007, p. 233, Cognitive English grammar.
0 kommentar(er)
