ATTN: Alan RE: "puzzling attributive clause"

Feel free to post here :)

Moderator: EC

Post Reply
User avatar
vonunov
Member
Posts: 2
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2022 6:23 am
Status: Other
Location: Texas, United States

ATTN: Alan RE: "puzzling attributive clause"

Post by vonunov »

viewtopic.php?f=199&t=83194

You might be interested to know about the use of "such" in legal writing, or [unnecessary and overwrought] "legalese" as some see it. It wasn't a typo or anything; the intent isn't "such a competitor" or "a competitor like that", but rather "the competitor immediately aforementioned". If "such a competitor" were used, it wouldn't be referring necessarily to the same specific competitor as at the beginning of the sentence. It is discussing any given competitor, granted, but the point is that any competitor must be from the same country as is the NOC that is entering that competitor, not the NOC that is entering such a competitor.

The bottom line for your learner is that legal writing is full of terms of art that are often archaic or otherwise don't align with general English usage. Legal writing usually shouldn't be used as a resource for learning English for that reason. In fact, I would say that lawyers are, on the whole, actually not that great at writing. They're taught that what they're doing is good writing, and in crafting intricate and arcane spells full of obscure and special words that are said to have particular meanings, they give the image of being writers entirely on another level. But their usage is often totally unnecessary -- a great many tropes of legal writing are not special incantations that are required to express a certain meaning, but simply archaic holdovers used by lawyers who feel the need to present that image, having been taught by other lawyers that this is how lawyers write, and being quite possibly hard-pressed at that point to write otherwise.

There are, of course, a good number of specific terms that are necessary, either by statute or tradition, to have a certain effect, but legal writing could be largely simplified to the benefit of everyone except those lawyers who prioritize billable hours over their own sanity.

These links can elaborate; I find these quotes from them especially informative:

https://forum.wordreference.com/threads ... h.2884573/
Once upon a time I spent a lot of time involved with contracts. The legal experts kept insisting on certain phrases and expressions that seemed odd to me. Their defence was that these phrases and expressions derived from years of contract litigation and, however quaint they seemed, they had a very specific legal meaning that could not now be disputed. If I insisted on a more natural form of English, they assured me that there would follow many months of lucrative (to the lawyers) negotiation over the possible meaning and misinterpration of my naive language.
https://lawprose.org/garners-usage-tip-of-the-day-such/
First, when used as a demonstrative adjective to modify a singular noun, “such” typifies legalese. And contrary to what some think, “such” isn’t any more precise than “the,” “that,” or “those.”
https://tips.slaw.ca/2016/research/said-same-such/
All three – said, same and such – are useless lawyerisms, even when correctly deployed. Avoid them (even when you can use them properly).
https://weagree.com/drafting-principles ... and-links/
2. Echo links: words or phrases echo a preceding qualification, condition or concept. An echo link between two provisions of a contract provides a strong connection and is therefore a useful technique to avoid ambiguity. At the same time, contract drafters tend to expand the echo links to avoid ambiguity. Therefore, always remember the general drafting principles of keeping a contract simple and clear (i.e., ‘write short sentences’ and ‘delete unnecessary words’ – see this weblog or paragraphs 1.1(a) and 1.1(d) in the Contract Drafting Manual on this website). An ‘echo link’ often appears together with the pointing word such (e.g., “…such prohibitions do not…”). As a matter of style, consider limiting yourself to the more elegant pointing word the or this.
Post Reply