Cover not available

In:Unlocking the History of English: Pragmatics, prescriptivism and text types
Edited by Luisella Caon, Moragh S. Gordon and Thijs Porck
[Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 364] 2024
► pp. 101–128

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload Book PDF
EPUB logo with download linkDownload Book EPUB
authorization required

Is legal discourse really “outside the ravages of time”?

A diachronic analysis of nominalizations in British judicial decisions

 | University of Oviedo
Published online: 4 April 2024
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.364.05rod
Abstract
This study explores word-based nominalizations between 1535 and 2021 in legal decisions. Nominalizations and the passive are usually proscribed in contemporary legal drafting manuals. Recent research has shown that there has been a notable reduction in the use of the passive, probably aided by campaigns promoting a plainer language accessible to the general public. However, nominalizations have received scarce attention in the literature to date. The data here show that nominalizations, especially those formed with Romance suffixes, tend to increase in frequency and productivity over time in legal decisions, probably acting as a compensation for the decrease in the use of the passive voice, or motivated by a general increase in the nominal density of legal decisions.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Nominalizations in legal discourse
  • 3.Sources and methodology
  • 4.Results
    • 4.1Overall distribution
    • 4.2Diachronic distribution
  • 5.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgments
  • Notes
  • References
  • Appendix
References (68)
References
Anderson, K. 2000. Productivity in English nominal and adjectival derivation, 1100–2000 [unpublished PhD dissertation]. University of Western Australia.
Atkinson, D. 1999. Scientific discourse in sociohistorical context. The Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, 1675–1975. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Baayen, H. 1989. A corpus-based approach to morphological productivity. Statistical analysis and psycho-linguistic interpretation [unpublished PhD dissertation]. Free University of Amsterdam.
1992. Quantitative aspects of morphological productivity. In G. Booij & J. van Marle (eds.), Yearbook of Morphology 1991, 109–149. Kluwer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2008. Analyzing linguistic data. A practical introduction to statistics using R. Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Banks, D. 2005. On the historical origins of nominalized process in scientific text. English for Specific Purposes 24. 347–357. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bauer, L. 2001. Morphological productivity. Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2001. Morphological productivity. Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bhatia, V. K. 1993. Analyzing genre: Language use in professional settings. Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Biber, D. 1986. Spoken and written textual dimensions in English: Resolving the contradictory findings. Language 62. 384–414. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
1988. Variation across speech and writing. Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Biber, D. & B. Gray. 2019. Are law reports an “agile” or an “uptight” register? Tracking patterns of historical change in the use of colloquial and complexity features. In T. Fanego & P. Rodríguez-Puente (eds.), Corpus-based research on variation in English legal discourse, 149–169. John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Biber, D., S. Johansson, G. Leech, S. Conrad & E. Finegan. 1999. Longman grammar of spoken and written English. Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brezina, V. 2018. Statistics in corpus linguistics: A practical guide. Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brown, P. & S. C. Levinson. 1987. Politeness. Some universals in language usage. Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bulatović, V. 2013. Legal language: The passive voice myth. ESP Today. Journal of English for Specific Purposes at Tertiary Level 1(1). 93–112.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Butt, P. & R. Castle. 2006. Modern legal drafting: A guide to using clearer language. Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cowie, C. 1998. Diachronic word-formation: A corpus-based study of derived nominalizations in the history of English [unpublished PhD dissertation]. University of Cambridge.
Cowie, C. & C. Dalton-Puffer. 2002. Diachronic word-formation and studying changes. In productivity over time: Theoretical and methodological considerations. In J. E. Díaz Vera (ed.), A changing world of words, 410–437. Rodopi. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Crystal, D. 2019. The Cambridge encyclopedia of the English language. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Crystal, D. & D. Davy. 1969. Investigating English style. Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dalton-Puffer, C. 1996. The French influence on Middle English morphology: A corpus-based study of derivation. Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Di Renzo Villata, M. G. 2007. Legal English. Cedam.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fanego, T., P. Rodríguez-Puente, M. J. López-Couso, B. Méndez-Naya, P. Núñez-Pertejo, C. Blanco-García & I. Tamaredo. 2017. The Corpus of Historical English Law Reports 1535–1999 (CHELAR): A resource for analysing the development of English legal discourse. ICAME Journal 41. 67–96. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gardner, A. C. 2014. Derivation in Middle English: Regional and text type variation. Société Néophilologique.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Garner, B. A. 2001. Legal writing in Plain English: A text with exercises. The University of Chicago Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Görlach, M. 1999. English in nineteenth-century England: An introduction. Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goźdź-Roszkowski, S. 2011. Patterns of linguistic variation in American legal English. A corpus-based study. Peter Lang. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Haigh, R. 2009. Legal English. Routledge-Cavendish. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 2004. The language of Science. Continuum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. & J. R. Martin. 1993. Writing science. Literary and discursive power. The Falmer Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hilpert, M. 2013. Constructional change in English: Developments in allomorphy, word formation and syntax. Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hiltunen, R. 1990. Chapters on legal English. Aspects past and present of the language of the law. Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kearns, M. 2007. Legal English. Colex.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lloyd, C. 2011. Semantics and word formation. The semantic development of five French suffixes in Middle English. Peter Lang. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mattiello, E. 2010. Nominalization in English and Italian normative legal texts. ESP across Culture 7. 129–146.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Myers, G. 1990. Writing biology: Texts in the social construction of scientific knowledge. The University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nevalainen, T. 1999. Early Modern English lexis and semantics. In R. Lass (ed.), The Cambridge history of the English language. Volume 3: 1479–1776, 332–458. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
OED = Oxford English Dictionary. Oxford University Press. [URL]
Palmer, C. 2015. Measuring productivity diachronically: Nominal suffixes in English letters, 1400–1600. English Language and Linguistics 19(1). 107–129. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pavlíčková, E. 2012. The role of nominalisation in English legal texts. In A. Kačmárová (ed.), English Matters III, 4–10. Prešovska univerzita.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Plag, I. 2003. Word-formation in English. Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
R Core Team. 2020. R version 4.0.3. A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. [URL]
Riera, C. 2015. Plain English in legal language: A comparative study of two UK acts of parliament. Alicante Journal of English Studies 28. 147–163. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rodríguez-Puente, P. 2011. Introducing the Corpus of Historical English Law Reports: Structure and compilation techniques. Revista de Lenguas para Fines Específicos 17. 99–120.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2019. Interpersonality in legal written discourse: A diachronic analysis of personal pronouns in law reports, 1535–present. In T. Fanego & P. Rodríguez-Puente (eds.), Corpus-based research on variation in English legal discourse, 171–199. John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2020a. Historical legal discourse: British law reports. In E. Friginal & J. A. Hardy (eds.), The Routledge handbook of corpus approaches to discourse analysis, 499–517. Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2020b. Register variation in word-formation processes: The development of -ity and -ness in Early Modern English. International Journal of English Studies 20(2). 147–169. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rodríguez-Puente, P. & D. Hernández-Coalla. 2022. Corpus of Contemporary English Legal Decisions, 1950–2021 (CoCELD). University of Oviedo.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2023. The Corpus of Contemporary English Legal Decisions, 1950–2021 (CoCELD): A new tool for analysing recent changes in English legal discourse. ICAME Journal 47.109–117. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rodríguez-Puente, P., T. Fanego, M. J. López-Couso, B. Méndez-Naya & P. Núñez-Pertejo. 2016. Corpus of Historical English Law Reports 1535–1999 (CHELAR). University of Santiago de Compostela: Research Unit for Variation, Linguistic Change and Grammaticalization, Department of English and German.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Romero-Barranco, J. 2020. A comparison of some French and English nominal suffixes in early English correspondence. In L. Wright (ed.), Multilingual origins of Standard English, 467–486. Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Säily, T. & J. Suomela. 2009. Comparing type counts: The case of women, men and -ity in early English letters. In A. Renouf & A. Kehoe (eds.), Corpus linguistics: Refinements and reassessments, 87–109. Rodopi. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sánchez-Febrero, J. L. 2003. Legal English and translation: Theory and practice. Annotated texts and documents. Editorial Club Universitario.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Scott, M. 2020. WordSmith tools version 8. Lexical Analysis Software.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Seoane, E. 2006. Changing styles: On the recent evolution of scientific British and American English. In C. Dalton-Puffer, D. Kastovsky, N. Ritt & H. Schendl (eds.), Syntax, style and grammatical norms: English from 1500–2000, 191–211. Peter Lang.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Shiflett, M. 2017. Plain English Movement and its influence on today’s legal English. International Journal of Novel Research in Interdisciplinary Studies 4(2). 11–14.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Shinichiro, T. 2009. Nominalizations and passivizations in the Present day UK legal discourse and in other genres. Language, Culture and Communication 1. 53–73.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tartaglia, M. 2015. Getting a movement to move: The Plain Language Movement. ICADE. Revista Cuatrimestral de las Facultades de Derecho y Ciencias Económicas y Empresariales 94. 177–208. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tiersma, P. M. 1999. Legal language. The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tyrkkö, J. & T. Hiltunen. 2009. Frequency of nominalization in Early Modern English medical writing. In A. Jucker, D. Schreier & M. Hundt (eds.), Corpora: Pragmatics and discourse, 297–320. Rodopi.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ventola, E. 1996. Packing and unpacking of information in academic texts. In E. Ventola & A. Mauranen (eds.), Academic writing. Intercultural and textual issues, 153–194. John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Williams, C. 2004. Legal English and plain language: An introduction. ESP Across Cultures 1. 111–124.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2007. Tradition and change in legal English. Verbal constructions in prescriptive texts. Peter Lang.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2013. Changes in the verb phrase legislative language in English. In B. Aarts, J. Close, G. Leech & S. Wallis (eds.), The verb phrase in English. Investigating recent language change with corpora, 353–371. Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wydick, R. C. 2005. Plain English for lawyers. Carolina Academic Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zaharia, A. M. 2010. Nominalizations in legal language. Analele Universitatii din Craiova, Seria Ştiinţe Filologice, Limbi Străine Aplicate, Anul VI, 1–2. 539–546.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue