|
Perm University Herald. Juridical Sciences. 2022. Issue 3 (57) |
||||||||||
| Title: | THE LANGUAGE OF REGULATORY LEGAL ACTS: IS IT TIME TO SOUND THE ALARM? |
|||||||||
| Authors: |
A. V. Knutov, National Research University, Higher School of Economics |
 |
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. | |||||||
| ORCID: | 0000-0003-1595-0466 |
ResearcherID: | P-9044-2015 |
|||||||
| Статьи автора в БД «Scopus» и «Web of Science»: | DOI 10.1007/978-3-030-37464-8_7 | |||||||||
|
A. V. Chaplinsky, National Research University, Higher School of Economics |
|
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. | ||||||||
| ORCID: | 0000-0002-4972-5032 | ResearcherID: | L-4797-2015 |
|||||||
| Статьи автора в БД «Scopus» и «Web of Science»: | --- | |||||||||
| D. R. Alimpeev, National Research University, Higher School of Economics |
|
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. | ||||||||
| ORCID: | 0000-0002-4010-7609 |
ResearcherID: | AHD-6475-2022 |
|||||||
| Статьи автора в БД «Scopus» и «Web of Science»: | --- | |||||||||
| Requisites: | Knutov A. V., Chaplinsky A. V., Alimpeev D. R. Yazyk normativnykh pravovykh aktov: pora li bit' trevogu? [The Language of Regulatory Legal Acts: Is It Time to Sound the Alarm?]. Vestnik Permskogo universiteta. Juridicheskie nauki – Perm University Herald. Juridical Sciences. 2022. Issue 57. Pp. 399–426. (In Russ.). DOI: 10.17072/1995-4190-2022-57-399-426 |
|||||||||
| DOI: | 10.17072/1995-4190-2022-57-399-426 |
|||||||||
| Annotation: |
Introduction: the article describes the experience of assessing the readability of regulatory legal acts by analyzing the complexity of syntactic constructions used in the texts. According to the subjective perception, normative texts become more complicated from year to year, which makes it difficult to interpret them and understand the legal meaning. Purpose: to test this hypothesis based on metrics and, if confirmed, to formulate recommendations for simplification of legal texts. For this, the authors studied the methods used in Russia and across the world to assess the complexity of official texts and to simplify them. Methods: having not found suitable tools for assessing the readability of syntactically overburdened texts of regulatory legal acts, the authors applied their own assessment methodology based on machine analysis of syntax indicators. The investigation was conducted in relation to specially prepared corpora of texts: 12 corpora of all federal laws effective on different dates and a corpus of 3,390 by-laws. The study also compared the syntactic complexity of regulatory legal acts and texts of other categories (fiction, articles in the media, etc.). Results: the study proves that the degree of syntactic complexity of legal texts is significantly higher than that of texts of other styles; moreover, it increases with time. For example, federal regulations being in effect at the end of 2021 are by 33% more complex than those in force in 1991. Conclusions: the modern language of regulatory legal acts is excessively complicated. As a rule, the same content can be presented in a simpler manner. The review of the literature showed that the growing complexity of legal texts is a vital issue to address not only in Russia. To overcome the existing negative practice, administrative measures are required, such as the preparation of recommendations for the texts of draft regulatory legal acts and the ex- pansion of the subject of linguistic assessment that such texts undergo. |
|||||||||
| Keywords: | language of laws; language of regulations; readability; syntactic complexity of regulations; evaluation of syntactic complexity; plain legal language; legal techniques of rulemaking; linguistic assessment of draft regulations |
|||||||||
 |
download the full-version article |
|||||||||
| References: | 1. Gosudarstvennyy yazyk Rossii: normy prava i normy yazyka [The State Language of Russia: Norms of Law and Norms of Language]. Ed. by S. A. Belov, N. M. Kropachev. St. Petersburg, 2018. 130 p. (In Russ.). 2. Dmitrieva A. V. Iskusstvo yuridicheskogo pis'ma: kolichestvennyy analiz resheniy Konstitutsionnogo Suda Rossii [The Art of Legal Writing: A Quantitative Analysis of Decisions of the Constitutional Court of Russia]. Sravnitel'noe konstitutsionnoe obozrenie – Comparative Constitutional Review. 2017. Issue 3 (118). Pp. 125–133. DOI: 10.21128/1812-7126-2017-3-125-133. (In Russ.). 3. Normografiya: teoriya i tekhnologiya normotvorchestva: uchebnik dlya vuzov [Normography: Theory and Technology of Rulemaking: textbook for universities]. Ed. by Yu. G. Arzamasov. Moscow, 2022. 542 p. (In Russ.). 4. Slozhnost' pravovykh aktov v Rossii: Leksicheskoe i sintaksicheskoe kachestvo tekstov [The Complexity of Legal Acts in Russia: Lexical and Syntactic Quality of Texts]. R. Kuchakov, D. Savel'ev. Ed. by D. Skugarevskiy. St. Petersburg, 2018. 20 p. Available at: https://enforce.spb.ru/images/analit_zapiski/memo_readability_2018_web.pdf. (In Russ.). 5. Romanov N. A. Klipovaya kul'tura v sovremennom mediaprostranstve [Clip Culture in Modern Media Space]. Chelovek. Kul'tura. Obrazovanie – Human. Culture. Education. 2017. Issue 3 (25). Pp. 97–106. (In Russ.). 6. Savel'ev D. A. O sozdanii i perspektivakh ispol'zovaniya korpusa tekstov rossiyskikh pravovykh aktov kak nabora otkrytykh dannykh [On the Creation and Prospects of Using the Corpus of Russian Legal Acts as an Open Dataset]. Pravo. Zhurnal Vysshey shkoly ekonomiki – Law. Journal of the Higher School of Economics. 2018. Issue 1. Pp. 26–44. DOI: 10.17323/20728166.2018.1.26.44. (In Russ.). 7. Savel'ev D. A. Issledovanie slozhnosti predlozheniy, sostavlyayushchikh teksty pravovykh aktov organov vlasti Rossiyskoy Federatsii [Research into Complexity of Sentences Constituting the Texts of Legal Acts by the Authorities of the Russian Federation]. Pravo. Zhurnal Vysshey shkoly ekonomiki – Law. Journal of the Higher School of Economics. 2020. Issue 1. Pp. 50–74. DOI: 10.17323/2072-8166.2020.1.50.74. (In Russ.). 8. Chaplinskiy A. V., Plaksin S. M. Zakonoproektnaya deyatel'nost' Pravitel'stva Rossiyskoy Federatsii [Legislative Activity of the Government of the Russian Federation]. Rossiyskaya yustitsiya– Russian Justice. 2017. Issue 10. Pp. 43–46. (In Russ.). 9. Shepelev A. N. Yazyk prava kak samostoyatel'nyy funktsional'nyy stil': dis. kand. yurid.nauk [The Language of Law as an Independent Functional Style: Cand. jurid. sci. diss.]. Tambov, 2002. 217 p. (In Russ.). 10. Armstrong W. P. Point: In Defense of Legalese. The Scribes Journal of Legal Writing. 1992. Vol. 3. Pp. 33–37. (In Eng.). Кнутов А. В., Чаплинский А. В., Алимпеев Д. Р. 426 11. Bapna N. Plain Language Drafting: A Study of the Laws of India (2009–17). Statute Law Review. 2020. Vol. 41. Issue 3. Pp. 348–377. DOI: 10.1093/slr/hmy022. (In Eng.). 12. Benson R. W. The End of Legalese: The Game is Over. N. Y. U. Review of Law & Social Change. 1985. Vol. 13. Issue 3. Pp. 519–574. (In Eng.). 13. Garner B. A. Legal Writing in Plain English: A Text with Exercises. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2013. 256 p. (In Eng.). 14. Gazzola M. Multilingual Communication for Whom? Language Policy and Fairness in the European Union. European Union Politics. 2016. Vol. 17. Issue 4. Pp. 546–569. DOI: 10.1177/ 1465116516657672. (In Eng.). 15. Flesch R. F. How to Write Plain English. New York: Barnes & Noble, 1981. 144 p. (In Eng.). 16. Hwang M. Plain English in Commercial Contracts. Malaya Law Review. 1990. Vol. 32. Issue 2. Pp. 296–310. (In Eng.). 17. Hyland R. A Defense of Legal Writing. University of Pennsylvania Law Review. 1986. Vol. 134. Issue 3. Pp. 599–626. DOI: 10.2307/ 3312113. (In Eng.). 18. Klinck D. R. The Word of the Law: Approaches to Legal Discourse. Ottawa: Carleton University Press, 1992. 458 p. (In Eng.). 19. Kuang E. F. et al. Does Government Report Readability Matter? Evidence from Market Reactions to AAERs. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy. 2020. Vol. 39. Issue 2. Pp. 1–20. DOI: 10.1016/j.jaccpubpol.2019.106697. (In Eng.). 20. Mellinkoff D. The Language of the Law. Boston: Little, Brown and Co, 1963. 526 p. (In Eng.). 21. Stark S. Why Lawyers Can't Write. Harvard Law Review. 1984. Vol. 97. Issue 6. Pp. 1389–1393. DOI: 10.2307/1340970. (In Eng.). 22. Sullivan R. The Promise of Plain Language Drafting. McGill Law Journal. 2002. Vol. 47. Issue 1. Pp. 97–128. (In Eng.). 23. Wszalek J. Ethical and Legal Concerns Associated with the Comprehension of Legal Language and Concepts. AJOB Neuroscience. 2017. Vol. 8. Issue 1. Pp. 26–36. DOI: 10.1080/ 21507740.2017.1285821. (In Eng.). 24. Wydick R. C., Sloan A. E. Plain English for Lawyers. Durham, NC: Carolina Academic Press, 2019. 178 p. (In Eng.). |
|||||||||
| Financing: |
The paper was prepared as part of research under the Big project of the HSE University ‘Speech practices of Russian society: professional and socio-cultural perspectives’ |
|||||||||
614068, Perm, street Bukireva, 15 (Faculty of Law), +7 (342) 2 396 275
vesturn@yandex.ru
ISSN 1995-4190 ISSN (eng.) 2618-8104
ISSN (online) 2658-7106
DOI 10.17072/1995-4190
The certificate on registration of mass media ПИ № ФС77-33087 from September, 5th, 2008
The certificate on reregistration of mass media ПИ № ФС77-53189 from Marth, 14th, 2013
The magazine is included in List ВАК and in the Russian index of scientific citing
The founder & Publisher: the State educational institution of the higher training
“The Perm State University”.
Publishing 4 times a year