原文标题：
Language and the law
Why legal writing is so awful
Never attribute to malice what can be explained by mere convenience
语言与法律
为什么法律文书如此糟糕
永远不要将纯粹出于方便的行为归因于恶意
[Paragraph 1]
“THE FIRST thing we do, let’s kill all the lawyers,” is one of Shakespeare’s most memorable lines.
“我们要做的第一件事是杀掉所有的律师”，这是莎士比亚经典名言之一。
You would struggle to find such a line in the writings of lawyers themselves—and not just because they would, presumably, disagree.
你很难在律师自己的著作中找到这种句子–不仅仅是由于他们可能不同意。
Though some judges are sophisticated stylists, most legal language is fussy, tangled and incapable of producing anything so pithy. (This is no doubt one reason so many people want to kill all the lawyers.)
尽管一些法官是老练的文书写手，但大多数法律语言都是繁琐的、复杂的，且无法产生简洁有力的表达。(这无疑是许多人想杀死所有律师的缘由之一。)
But do lawyers write that way to impress, to bewilder—or perhaps because they must?
但律师那样写是为了给人留下深刻印象，使人困惑，还是由于他们必须这样写？
[Paragraph 2]
In a study published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Eric Martínez and his colleagues from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and the University of Edinburgh tried to find out.
在《美国国家科学院院刊》发表的一项研究中，埃里克.马丁内斯和他的麻省理工学院和爱丁堡大学的同事尝试找出答案。
Contracts written in “legalese”, as well as simplified versions conveying identical concepts, were shown to American lawyers and laypeople.
他们向美国律师和非专业人员展示了用 “法律语言 “写成的合同，以及传达一样概念的简化语言合同。
It turns out that lawyers struggle with, and dislike, legal language almost as much as their clients.
实际证明，律师几乎和他们的客户一样，对法律语言感到困难和厌恶。
[Paragraph 3]
Legalese is heavy on “centre-embedding”, sentences in which related words are separated by a long insertion, as in “It is understood by artist and company that comprehensive liability insurance, protecting against any claim or demand up to $300,000, including attorney’s fees, related to company’s actions under this venue agreement, shall be purchased and maintained throughout the agreement by company.”
法律语言重在 “中心嵌入”，相关词之间用长长的插入语分隔开，如 “据艺术家和公司了解，全责保险可以覆盖高达 30万美元的任何索赔或要求 ，包括公司根据场馆协议采取行动相关的律师费等。全责保险应由公司购买，且在整个协议期间有效。”
This puts a heavy strain on the brain’s working memory. The word “insurance” must be held in the mind while some 20 other words go by before its attendant verb phrase “shall be purchased” arrives.
这给大脑的临时记忆带来了沉重的负担。 “保险”这个词必须牢记在心，而在它的相应动词短语“应购买”出现之前，中间大约出现了 20 个其他词。
[Paragraph 4]
Another baleful feature of legal writing is jargon: uncommon words like hereinbefore, mala fides and lessor. These mean little more than above, bad faith and landlord.
法律文书另一个吓退读者的特点是使用行话：像hereinbefore、mala fides和lessor这样不常见的词，意思实则就是上文、不诚实和房东。
Even if most lawyers and many laypeople know the jargon, the words require more effort to recall than everyday ones.
即使大多数律师和许多非专业人士都知道这些行话，但与日常用语相比，人们需要花更多时间来回忆。
[Paragraph 5]
Given the almost universal disdain for legal language, the obvious question is why it persists.
如果大部人不喜爱法律语言，那它为什么还会持续存在呢。
Mr Martínez and his colleagues examined several hypotheses.
马丁内斯和他的同事们检验了几种假设。
One was “the curse of knowledge”. This is the idea that many learned people do not know how to write for those less informed than themselves.
一个是 “知识的诅咒”，即许多有学问的人不知道如何向学问浅的人解释事情。
But the researchers found that the lawyers struggle with legal language too. They found the content of the legalese contracts harder to understand and remember.
但研究人员发现，律师们也认为法律语言很难。他们发现用法律语言写的合同内容更难理解和记忆。
So did laypeople, of course, but they remembered the simple contracts as well as the lawyers did the complex ones; they understood them almost as well, too.
当然，非专业人员也是如此，但他们对简单合同的记忆与律师对复杂合同的记忆一样好；他们对合同的理解也几乎一样好。
[Paragraph 6]
A more cynical idea was the “it’s just business” hypothesis. This holds that lawyers are intentionally opaque so as to gull clients into paying more for their supposed expertise.
一个更愤世嫉俗的观点是 “这一切都只是生意 “的假说，即律师故意不透明，以便诱使客户为其所谓的专业知识支付更多费用。
But that did not fit the data either, for the lawyers believed their clients would be more likely to sign the simplified contracts than the standard ones.
但这也与数据不符，由于律师们认为他们的客户更有可能签署简化合同，而不是标准合同。
[Paragraph 7]
Perhaps legalese is a form of “in-group signalling”—behaviour used to signal belonging to a group, such as religious iconography or flag-waving at sports events, and aimed at fellow lawyers rather than clients?
也许法律术语是一种 “群体内信号”–用来表明属于某个群体的行为，如宗教图腾或体育赛事中挥舞旗帜的行为，法律术语针对的是律师同行而不是客户？
But the lawyers in the test group said they would be more likely to hire the writers of the simplified contracts than the authors of the traditional gobbledygook.
但测试组中的律师说，他们更有可能雇用简化合同写手，而不是深奥天书写手。
[Paragraph 8]
The most common defence of legalese is the need for precision, says Mr Martínez (who trained as a lawyer before switching to cognitive science).
马丁内斯（他在转向认知科学之前受过律师培训）说，支持法律术语最常见的理由是精准性需求。
Legal language, in this view, is too important to leave to the imprecisions of ordinary style.
这种观点认为法律语言太重大了，不能任由普通语言传递不精准意思。
But this argument was refuted too: the lawyers who read the simplified contracts rated them just as enforceable as the complex ones.
但反驳者说：阅读过简化合同的律师认为，简化合同与复杂合同一样具有可执行性。
[Paragraph 9]
The researchers were left with a simple conclusion, which they call the “copy-and-paste hypothesis”.
研究人员得出了一个简单的结论，他们称之为 “复制粘贴假说”。
Lawyers imitate what previous lawyers have done. After all, a good deal of rote legal work (such as drawing up contracts) can be copied in large chunks from one document to another.
律师们模仿以前律师所做的事情。毕竟，大量机械重复的法律工作（例如起草合同）可以大块地从一份文件复制到另一份文件中。
Whatever the reason, changing behaviour will be hard. Experts in legal writing have called for clearer prose for decades.
不管是什么缘由，改变行为都是困难的。几十年来，法律文书专家们一直呼吁更清晰的散文风格。
But the plague of legalese persists. Perhaps evidence from outside the profession will help change things—especially if it is written in plain language.
但是，法律术语依旧普遍存在。也许行业外的证据将有助于改变现状–尤其是如果它是用通俗易懂的语言写成的。
（祝贺读完，本篇英语词汇量726左右）
原文出自：2023年6月3日《The Economist》Science & technology版块
精读笔记来源于：自由英语之路
本文翻译整理: Irene
本文编辑校对: Irene
仅供个人英语学习交流使用。
【补充资料】（来自于网络）
场馆协议Venue agreement是指当组织者（一般是音乐、体育或其他娱乐活动的主办方）在一个场地（一般是演唱会场馆、体育馆或剧院）举办活动时，与场地所有者签订的一份协议。该协议包括了租借场地的费用、使用时间、安全规定、保险要求、责任分配等方面的条款，以确保活动的顺利进行，并减少可能的纠纷和风险。该协议对于组织者和场地所有者双方都超级重大，由于它规定了各自的权利和责任。
群体内信号in-group signalling指的是在一个团体或社群中通过特定行为、言语或符号等方式表明自己属于该团体，并与团体内的其他成员建立联系和认同感。这种信号旨在向团体内部传达一种信息，即自己是该团体的一员，并且符合该团体内部的价值观和规范。这种信号可以加强团体内部的凝聚力和认同感，并协助建立团体内部的社会结构和等级制度。
【重点句子】（3个）
It turns out that lawyers struggle with, and dislike, legal language almost as much as their clients.
实际证明，律师几乎和他们的客户一样，对法律语言感到困难和厌恶。
One was “the curse of knowledge”. This is the idea that many learned people do not know how to write for those less informed than themselves.
一个是 “知识的诅咒”，即许多有学问的人不知道如何向学问浅的人解释事情。
A more cynical idea was the “it’s just business” hypothesis. This holds that lawyers are intentionally opaque so as to gull clients into paying more for their supposed expertise.
一个更愤世嫉俗的观点是 “这一切都只是生意 “的假说，即律师故意不透明，以便诱使客户为其所谓的专业知识支付更多费用。
自由英语之路
- 最新
- 最热
只看作者