| dc.contributor.author | Berezowski, Leszek | en |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2015-06-12T11:21:19Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2015-06-12T11:21:19Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2011-06-17 | en |
| dc.identifier.issn | 1731-7533 | en |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/11089/9578 | |
| dc.description.abstract | The paper examines the use of the modal verb SHALL in the if clauses of conditionals found in legal English. The study traces the history of such usages and compares them to two uses of WILL attested in the same grammatical environment: a temporal use and a nonepistemic modal use. The comparison provides the foundation for examining the use of SHALL in Biblical translations, where this verb has outlived its demise in general English, and both of these sources inform the analysis of SHALL in legal conditionals. Specifically, it is claimed that SHALL is not inherently deontic in legal English but is used as an explicit marker of the authority vested in the author or authors of spoken and written texts. This approach explains why authority conscious drafters can use SHALL in the if clauses of conditionals and in temporal clauses whenever they want to and why the proponents of the plain language movement advocate simply deleting SHALL from legal writing and not replacing it with more popular modals expressing deontic meanings, e.g. HAVE TO, MUST, etc. It is claimed that no such replacements are recommended because there is no deontic meaning to replace and the authority designated by SHALL can be inferred from the context. | en |
| dc.publisher | Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego | en |
| dc.relation.ispartofseries | Research in Language;9 | en |
| dc.rights | This content is open access. | en |
| dc.subject | legal English | en |
| dc.subject | modal verbs | en |
| dc.subject | SHALL | en |
| dc.subject | conditionals | en |
| dc.subject | temporal clauses | en |
| dc.title | Curious Legal Conditionals | en |
| dc.page.number | 187-197 | en |
| dc.contributor.authorAffiliation | Wrocław University, Poland | en |
| dc.identifier.eissn | 2083-4616 | |
| dc.references | Arnovick, Leslie K. 1990. The Development of Future Constructions in English. The Pragmatics of Modal and temporal Will and Shall in Middle English. Bern: Peter Lang. | en |
| dc.references | Bergs, Alexander. 2008. Shall and shan't in contemporary English - a case of functional condensation. In: Trousdale, G. and Gisborne, N. (eds.) Constructional Approaches to English Grammar, pp. 113-144. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. | en |
| dc.references | Black, H. 1983. Black's Law Dictionary. St. Paul: West Publishing Company. | en |
| dc.references | Comrie, B. 1982. Future time reference in conditional protasis. Australian Journal of Linguistics 2: 143-152. doi: 10.1080/07268608208599288 | en |
| dc.references | Conte, Amadeo G. and Paolo Di Lucia. 2009. Pragmatic ambiguity: the thetic function of modality. Lodz Papers in Pragmatics 5: 191-199. DOI: doi: 10.2478/v10016-009-0009-7 | en |
| dc.references | Declerck, Renaat. 1984. ‘Pure future’ will in if clauses. Lingua 63: 279-312. DOI: doi: 10.1016/0024-3841(84)90036-6 | en |
| dc.references | Declerck, Renaat and S. Reed. 2001. Conditionals. A Comprehensive Empirical Analysis. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. | en |
| dc.references | Ellingworth, Paul. 2007. Translation techniques in modern Bible translation. In: Noss, P (ed.) A History of Bible Translation pp 307-334. Rome: American Bible Society. | en |
| dc.references | Gotti, Maurizio, M. Dossena, R. Dury, R. Facchinetti and M. Lima. 2002. Variation in Central Modals. A Repertoire of Forms and Types of Usage in Middle English and Early Modern English. Bern: Peter Lang. | en |
| dc.references | Gotti, Maurizio. 2003. Shall and will in contemporary English: a comparison with past uses. In: R. Facchinetti, M. Krug and F. Palmer (eds.) Modality in contemporary English pp. 267-300. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. | en |
| dc.references | Kimble, Joseph. 2000. The Great Myth that Plain Language is not Precise. The Scribes Journal of Legal Writing 1998-2000: 109-119. | en |
| dc.references | Klinge, Alex. 1995. On the linguistic interpretation of contractual modalities. Journal of Pragmatics 23: 649-675. doi: 10.1016/0378-2166(94)00051-F | en |
| dc.references | Leech, G., M. Hundt, Ch. Mair and N. Smith. 2009. Change in Contemporary English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. | en |
| dc.references | Rissanen, M. 2000. Standardization and the language of early statutes. In: L. Wright. The Development of Standard English 1300 - 1800, pp. 117-130. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press | en |
| dc.references | Trosborg, Anna. 1995. Statutes and contracts: an analysis of legal speech acts in the English language of the law. Journal of Pragmatics 23: 31-53. DOI: doi: 10.1016/0378-2166(94)00034-C | en |
| dc.references | Visser, F. Th. 1963. An Historical Syntax of the English Language. Leiden: E.J. Brill. | en |
| dc.references | Williams, Christopher. 2007. Tradition and Change in Legal English. Bern: Peter Lang. | en |
| dc.references | Witczak-Plisiecka, Iwona. 2009. A note on the linguistic (in)determinancy in the legal context. Lodz Papers in Pragmatics 5: 201-226. DOI: doi: 10.2478/v10016-009-0013-y | en |
| dc.identifier.doi | 10.2478/v10015-011-0002-4 | en |
