Lawyerisms in Legal Translation: A Necessity or a Nuisance?

Legal translation is a balancing act that aims to maintain faithfulness to the source text while meeting the needs of the target audience. This challenge intensifies when dealing with lawyerisms; formal, archaic terms like hereinafter, said, or aforementioned. These phrases, as noted by Richard Wydick and Amy E. Sloan, often add a “legal smell” but lack substantive value. While certain terms, such as res ipsa loquitur, serve as precise legal shorthand, many lawyerisms add unnecessary complexity, potentially alienating readers.

Simplifying Lawyerisms: Examples and Alternatives

The Case Against “Said”

Take, for example, the use of said:

• Said property shall remain in the possession of said landlord for the duration of said agreement.

Replacing said with the simplifies the sentence without sacrificing precision:

• The property shall remain in the possession of the landlord for the duration of the agreement.

Why “Aforementioned” May Be Overkill

Similarly, aforementioned often duplicates information already conveyed. If only one plot of land has been mentioned, writing “the plot of land” instead of “the aforementioned plot of land” is equally clear and less cumbersome.

Lawyerisms in French-to-English Legal Translation

The task becomes even more nuanced in legal translation, especially when working between languages with different legal traditions, such as French and English. French legal texts often use formal structures, such as “le présent contrat” or “les parties soussignées”. While these phrases suit French legal writing conventions, their direct translation—“the present contract” or “the undersigned parties”—feels verbose in English.

Adapting French Lawyerisms for English readers

For instance:

• French: “En vertu des dispositions légales applicables, les soussignés déclarent…”
• Literal Translation: “By virtue of the applicable legal provisions, the undersigned declare…”
• Adapted Translation: “Under applicable law, the parties declare…”

Here, the streamlined version maintains precision while aligning with English legal style. Similarly:

• French: “Comme indiqué au paragraphe ci-dessus…”
• Literal Translation: “As indicated in the above paragraph…”
• Streamlined English: “As stated above…”

These adaptations require understanding the client’s expectations. Some clients may expect literal translations to preserve the “weight” of legal language, while others may prefer clear, modern English that improves readability. The key is gauging their openness to change. Translators can foster this dialogue by explaining that overly literal translations risk producing texts that are clunky or impenetrable to readers, particularly non-lawyers.

For example, a literal translation of “les présentes dispositions” as “the present provisions” adds unnecessary formality. Substituting it with “these provisions” enhances clarity without altering the meaning. Similarly, “ledit document” can often be replaced simply with “the document”.

Building Client Understanding and the Importance of Adapting Style

Educating clients on these nuances can be challenging, but it’s crucial. Translators must explain that while lawyerisms in French might carry weight and authority, replicating them verbatim in English often results in awkward phrasing that detracts from the document’s scope. Providing concrete examples can demonstrate how idiomatic refinements improve both readability and precision.

Tailoring translations for Different Audiences

Additionally, translators should consider the context of the target audience. Legal documents drafted for court filings or government agencies may require formal language, while those intended for business or individual clients might benefit from simpler phrasing. This flexibility ensures translations are fit for purpose while respecting the original text’s intent.

Ultimately, the goal of legal translation is to create a text that resonates with its target audience. This involves questioning the necessity of lawyerisms and embracing a pragmatic approach to linguistic adaptation. While lawyerisms might have their place, clarity, and usability should always take precedence, especially when bridging the stylistic divide between languages like French and English. By focusing on the reader’s experience and maintaining an open dialogue with clients, translators can craft documents that are not only accurate but also accessible and effective.

For more insights on the pitfalls of lawyerisms in legal writing, check out this engaging article from Lawctopus: “Are You Committing the Crime of Lawyerism?”.

At Traductions nexus, we specialize in striking the perfect balance between tradition and clarity in legal translation. Whether adapting French lawyerisms for English readers or ensuring your legal documents meet the stylistic and practical needs of their intended audience, we bring precision, flexibility, and an understanding of diverse legal systems to every project.

If you’re looking for a partner who can navigate the nuances of legal language while delivering translations that resonate with your audience, contact us today. Let us help you bridge the gap between linguistic tradition and modern accessibility.