Verbage
I’m taking a class called “Complex Litigation: Advanced Civil Procedure” with Dean Greenberger, a great professor whose sense of humor is nearly as dry as the subject matter of the course he teaches.
Complex Litigation is every bit as confusing as it sounds; the class deals with large multi-party and multi-forum civil cases, and how courts and litigants deal with them.
On top of this confusion, Dean Greenberger has a penchant for using what some would consider unnecessarily ornate vernacular—a virtual cornucopia of polysyllabic confabulation.
I know he’s aware of this because he just told us that one of his Anonymous Student Evaluation forms from last year read, “Could you talk more normal? I don’t know what ‘ensue’ means. Why do you have to use that word so much?”
I laughed along with the rest of the class, but I’m still not 100% sure what “ensue” means either. On the other hand, I’d never consider faulting a professor for using a word I didn’t know; if I really wanted to know what a word meant, I’d look it up.
For the rest of lecture, Greenberger used ‘ensue’ once per minute.
Does Greenberger have to use words like “ensue” and “convalesce” “acquiescence” in every other sentence? Probably not; I’ve gotten by twenty-four years without using them at all. Still, Greenberger is a smart guy, and he’s not using big words for the sake of using big words; he’s using them to say exactly what he wants to say.
That said, many of my classmates use big words for the sake of using big words. This usually happens when they volunteer answers in class. I assume their verbage will only get worse once they get their diplomas and pass the bar; they’ll probably see their graduation and bar passage as a validation of their verbage.
But in my classmates’ defense, is there any advantage to speaking legalese for the sake of speaking legalese? For example, do clients feel they’re getting their money’s worth when their lawyer peppers her casual conversation with Latin legal phrases? Does legalese scare opposing parties into settling cases? Any advantage at all?
Technorati Tags: Legalese, Latin Legal Phrases, Legal Terms, Complex Litigation
Posted in Classroom Observations | 
Subscribe to this feed
March 5th, 2007 at 9:57 pm
Everyone uses big words for the sake of sounding smart. In certain circles - academia, law - it is as legitimizing as a diploma. Thus, people get stuck in word ruts. Tragic, really.
March 5th, 2007 at 9:58 pm
P.S. The animated cornucopia? Wonderful. Look at that little rolly apple.
March 5th, 2007 at 10:30 pm
Ricky - I have to disagree with your point of view. To me, knowing and using the English language to its full extent is a special talent. I consider it an art form. Think of it as similar to the tools used to paint a masterpiece. Anyone can take paint and slap it on a canvas. The talent comes in using and manipulating the paint in ways most people cannot. Having the ability to use, and not just understand, “big” words allows the speaker to “paint” a far more vivid “picture” about any given topic. It also makes listening more interesting. I admire anyone who can do this and furthermore I suggest you DO look up any word you don’t understand immediately. While you are at it, study its Latin or Greek root (if it applies to the word). Susie, I have to disagree with you too. I don’t think “Everyone uses big words for the sake of sounding smart”. I think they do it because they have acquired a vocabulary that allows them to express what they want to say in a precise and sometimes colorful way. I don’t think they do it on “purpose” - I believe speaking that way just displays who they are and comes naturally. It would be awkward for someone to really “downsize” his vocabulary.
March 6th, 2007 at 10:11 am
a large vocabulary is, no doubt, akin to an artist’s pallette. a deft artist, though, knows to use his brightest colors sparingly in order to give them greatest impact. the smartest guy in the room may not be the one using the four-syllable words. he’s the one listening carefully, then expressing himself clearly and unaudaciously.
personally, i DO fight the urge to use the “high-level” vocabulary words that i know, unless the situation is absolutely appropriate.
i would rather be perceived as simply-spoken than puffed up.
March 6th, 2007 at 2:58 pm
It would seem that Linda has a related problem, a hyperactive usage of “quotations”. I find that many people also suffer from hyperactive comma usage. These and other grammatical diseases irk me to no end.
Since I attended a catholic middle school, an obsession with the correct formulation of sentences and the punctuation therein was lovingly pounded into my ample brain mass at the tender age of six.
My ensuing years of public education thankfully moved me out of this syntax-consumed environment and into one focused on fashion and getting laid. I have become fond of minimalist writing and think that kids in school should read at least as much Hemingway as Shakespeare.
Yet if somebody puts a comma, in the middle of a sentence because they haven’t used one yet, I must fight the urge to slap the next person I see.
In summary: learn how to write and speak correctly, but don’t be a jerk about it.
March 6th, 2007 at 3:06 pm
Counselor Ryan,
You know that Counselor Linda is my mom–right?
-Rick Lax
March 6th, 2007 at 5:10 pm
“”"”"”"”"”!@#$%^&”"”"”"”"”"”"
March 6th, 2007 at 7:41 pm
I don’t know if there’s an advantage as I’m still a Pre-L. But my advisor is having me take Latin I this semester, so hopefully I’ll at least understand some of the latin I use to sound smart in front of clients. Assuming I remember any of it three years from now when I get the JD.
March 7th, 2007 at 7:33 am
Counselor to be Lise:
Veni, vidi, vici. Unfortunately that is just about all the latin I’ve retained after 45 years.
March 7th, 2007 at 1:09 pm
Yes, I know Linda is your mom, but she deserves to know the truth. Her cookies are delicious, but her over-use of quotations is less than savory.
“Semper Fi”
March 7th, 2007 at 6:50 pm
Ok - I have no problem accepting the criticism about too many quotations. Actually, I see where I’ve done that - so that ends that. I’ll make fewer quotes and more cookies.
There is still one thing about this discussion that has nothing to do with quotation marks. It’s about vocabulary. I see nothing wrong with a professor or lawyer using vocabulary referred to as legalese when talking or writing to another member of the profession. I see every reason to use it in a law school class so that the students are well trained when faced with such terminology as they go out and practice law. Beyond that, I can agree that it should be each lawyer’s responsibility to instruct his/her clients or anyone else who may not understand the particular words relevant to a case. I can’t accept obliterating perfectly good descriptive words that concisely get a point across, particularly when used appropriately. I also see nothing wrong with a particular legal style - words like aforesaid, hereby, hereinafter, etc. - again, when used appropriately.
Should doctors also rename every disease and body part and talk to other doctors using simplified (but probably lengthier) descriptions of a case? We can agree, I’m sure, that they should explain an illness clearly to a patient. Is medical vocabulary just as much a target as legal vocabulary when used by professionals amongst each other and should they both be revamped at the same time?
As far as I’m concerned, people should strive to improve their vocabularies all through life and not whine about words they don’t know.
There! Not even one quotation mark. Feel free to diagram my sentences or correct my spelling and punctuation. It’s not my forte.
March 8th, 2007 at 12:45 pm
You people are all idiots. If you want to talk like fruitcakes, go ahead. Just don’t expect not to get punched in the face.
RAMBO out.
March 8th, 2007 at 7:22 pm
I second RAMBO.
March 9th, 2007 at 1:46 am
RAMBO,
What’s with all the name calling? Why post if it’s just to insult someone?
I respect most opinions, as vitriolic as they might be (i don’t not expect to not be punched for that one), but please, RAMBO, stop being an ass!
In future posts, I ask that you add something besides insults.
ELLIOTT in.
NOTE: I rarely fight insult with insult, but I think it’s justified here… if only out of respect to Ricky’s mom.
March 9th, 2007 at 8:26 am
I’d like to take issue with Linda’s evaluation of language. While it may be considered an artform for those who would persue such matters, it would be shortsighted to forget that the primary purpose of a language is to convey a message. If the recipients of the message are having difficulties understanding the content of the message, then the speaker is not nearly as skillful as s/he would like to be. While it is important for lawyers in training to learn to speak and think in the language used by lawyers, it may not be necessary to take it as far as this professor is indicated to have gone.
Rob
March 9th, 2007 at 10:41 am
I agree wholeheartedly with Counselor RobWreck and also take exception with Couselor Linda. One of the most important skils a young lawyer must develop is the ability to communicate effectively. Whether they may be standing in front of a jury or merely communicating with their clients, the use of “plain English” (sorry abou the use of quotation marks Counselor Ryan) is a necessity. Too many lawyers, young and old,, are overly impressed by their ability to utilize a multisyllabic word when one or more shorter words will do the trick.
March 11th, 2007 at 6:19 pm
I just calls ‘em how I sees ‘em. If anything of intelligence is said, I’ll comment on that. Until then…Elliot is a jerk.
June 20th, 2007 at 7:21 pm
Hello! Good Site! Thanks you!