This is a dictionary of the language of the law as used in America today. Most of this dictionary is written in ordinary English. Most of the words that lawyers use in writing and talking about the law are the ordinary words that fill the dictionaries of the English language. They have a place in this dictionary when the law gives them a specialized sense; or to emphasize that there is none. Too often an apparent change in sense results not from the law but from bad grammar or redundancy; or from an unsorted host of possible meanings jumbled together and left to the vagaries of interpretation. At the other extreme, individual cases, each walled in by its own distinctive facts and law, may give an immaculately narrowed sense, but neither generalized definition nor standards for the gradation of sense that is the essence of clear usage. A small number of citations to cases of special relevance to word usage are included in this dictionary. The citation count does not measure the indebtedness of this dictionary to old and current sources of American legal usage. The definitions and examples of usage in this dictionary have roots in the law reports of thousands of litigated cases; in law writings formal and informal, profound and trivial; in the talk of lawyers and judges in court and out--the formal and the informal--colloquial and slangy, talk that is precise and talk that is mush; in a long line of dictionaries past and present--law dictionaries, and dictionaries of English and its usage. Drawing from all those sources, the definitions and examples are shaped by more than a half-century of personal immersion in the oral and written language of the law, as law student, practicing lawyer, professor, and writer. And something has been added. This dictionary is designed to sort out the words used in the law, and to identify the different senses in which each is used, and can be used. With cross-reference, it tells how words are related to each other and separated for each other, so that discrimination and choice of usage are possible. Words are grouped together as identical, similar, disparate, departing from or paralleling the usages of ordinary English. Where usage is not uniform, the dictionary comments on what is better, best, and worst. The dictionary concentrates on general legal usage for a profession practicing in the American common law tradition . . . The dictionary does not detail the multitude of other jurisdictional variations, but calls attention to the fact of variation. Although the distinction is often difficult to make, this is a word dictionary, not a short legal encyclopedia. Technicalities in general legal usage are included, but not the intricacies of learning in specialized fields of the law. There is no standard legal pronunciation. Pronunciation is included here when it is unusual, exotic, controversial, or needed to prevent confusion. Pronunciation is rendered in simplified phonetics. American law dictionaries go back to 1839. This one is new and different. --David Mellinkoff, from the Preface

This is that rare book which both informs and entertains. It is scholarly and sprightly - an unusual combination for any book, let alone one treating of the law. Lawyers and laymen alike can read it with profit and amusement. I hope many do, for it deserves a wide audience. The Honorable Arthur J. Goldberg (1908-1990), United States Supreme Court, The New York Herald Tribune A superb piece of writing, lucid, witty, meticulous in scholarship and unfailingly interesting. Robert R. Kirsch, Los Angeles Times We now have a full-scale study of our legal language that is written with an extraordinary awareness for vacuous words and phrases and an astounding amount of research into their history and usage.... This book has a practical value to every lawyer who drafts a document, a pleading, or even a letter. It is a great plea to bring the law up to date by awakening us to the empty verbalisms in which we think we are housing our thoughts.... It is a rare book that has value for all lawyers, despite the tendency of publishers and reviewers to make this claim with great frequency. Here, however, is a rarity. No lawyer could fail to learn many facts of surprising interest. But beyond this, 'The Language of the Law' presents a subtle challenge to the American Bar, a stimulus to improve our work and our profession by sharpening the product of our minds. If we meet this challenge head-on, we can perform a far more fundamental and genuine service to our clients, the public, and to ourselves than any other area of improvement, including court reform, can possibly offer. Ray D. Henson, American Bar Association Journal It should be compulsory reading for lawyers and judges; for a layman it is learning and entertainment of high order. The Honorable Matthew O. Tobriner (d. 1982), Associate Justice, Supreme Court of California, San Francisco Chronicle ...[B]rilliant and discursive treatise, concisely and urbanely presented,...a remarkable stimulus, recommended highly to the general reader as well as the wordy professional. Hugo Sonnenschein, Jr., Chicago Daily News

With double the length and coverage of the original, this new edition of A Dictionary of Modern Legal Usage (DMLU) thoroughly marshals and analyzes modern legal vocabulary. Since the first edition, Bryan A. Garner has drawn on his unrivaled experience as a legal editor to refine his positions on legal usage and to add a wealth of new material. Here's how Garner's revision makes DMLU, Second Edition indispensable: -- Updates every existing entry, making this a second edition in the fullest sense; -- Adds hundreds of new entries; -- Adds hundreds of new sections within existing entries; -- Adds over 3,000 new illustrative quotations from judicial opinions and leading lawbooks by prominent legal commentators; -- Reconsiders previously held positions, now saying, for example, that contractions are sometimes permissible in legal writing; -- Fully elaborates ideas only mentioned in the first edition; -- Takes into account numerous comments received from first edition users; -- Expands and updates cross-references to guide readers quickly and easily. Influential writers and editors rely on DMLU daily. Charles Alan Wright, for example, says, "I consult Garner regularly. He offers authoritative guidance on many matters of usage that are unique to legal writing....Garner is almost always pithy; he is often witty. Any lawyer, no matter how expert on words and language, is sure to learn from Garner's fine book." And the editors of Harvard Law Review have found it essential: "In a work worthy of comparison to Fowler's Dictionary of Modern English Usage, Mr. Garner...sets forth an authoritative guide to American legal usage and style. All legal writers will find it an invaluable help; many law review editors will find it a source of delight. Don't confront your editor without it." Features: -- Functions both as a style guide and as a law dictionary -- Guides writers to distinguish between true terms of law and mere jargon -- Illustrates recommended forms of expression as well as common blunders with thousands of quotations and citations -- Explains the origins of expressions lawyers regularly use, such as Know all men by these presents, or party of the first part -- Records and evaluates more than 100 twentieth-century neologisms, from conclusory to farminor, from Mirandize to representee -- Distinguishes American from British usage and refers to current practice among Australian, Canadian, and Scottish legal writers -- Solves editorial problems by dealing with practical writing issues -- Offers wit and erudition reminiscent of H.W. Fowler, author of the first so-called usage dictionary. In short, in its Second Edition DMLU remains, as one reviewer hailed it in 1987, "truly unique in the literature of law." It is an essential resource for practicing lawyers, scholars of the law, and libraries of all sizes and types.

This book tells what the language of the law is, how it got that way and how it works out in the practice. The emphasis is more historical than philosophical, more practical than pedantic.

A comprehensive guide to legal style and usage, with practical advice on how to write clear, jargon-free legal prose. Includes style tips as well as definitions.

This study concentrates on three major issues creating a basis for the making of the "Czech-English Law Dictionary with Explanations", namely language, including terminology, in both the Czech and Anglo-American systems of law; the process of legal translation; and the lexicographic method of producing a bilingual law dictionary. Terminology has been considered the most significant feature of language for legal purposes. It encompasses a wide range of special-purpose vocabulary and higher syntactic units, including legal jargon. Conceptual analysis is to be pursued whenever an identical term in the target language does not exist or its full equivalent is in doubt. Legal translation should be based primarily on comparative legal, linguistic and genre analysis in order to make the transfer of legal information as precise, accurate and comprehensible as possible. The primary objective of legal translation is for the target recipient to be provided as explicit, extensive and precise legal information in the target language as is contained in the source text, complemented (by the translator) with facts rendering the original information fully comprehensible in the different legal environment and culture. A dictionary which will help its users to produce legal texts in the target language should be founded upon a profound comparative legal and linguistic analysis that will (a) determine equivalents at the levels of vocabulary, syntax and genre, (b) select the appropriate lexicographic material to be included in the dictionary, and (c) create entries in a user-friendly manner.