Abstract
In spite of the movements demanding clarity in legal texts, Latin expressions are still used in legal language, especially in legal argumentation. Opponents of an excess of linguistic reform argue that Latinisms serve a purpose, as they avoid ambiguity, and that such clear-cut terms may help towards the development of an international lingua franca for legal professionals. Through an analysis of recent opinions from the United States Supreme Court and the Spanish Constitutional Court, we shall explore whether Latinisms have a parallel frequency and usage in the two languages. In principle, one might expect Spanish jurists to be fonder of Latin formulae, due to their native language and training, and that Latin expressions might serve as a sort of interlanguage reference. However, while this may be theoretically the case, quantitative evidence seems to show otherwise: there appear to be more Latinisms in American legal English than in Spanish, at least in some genres, and furthermore, Latinisms differ in usage between the two languages.
Published Version
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
