Cover not available
Article published In:
Journal of Historical Pragmatics
Vol. 21:1 (2020) ► pp.28–52

Old English law-codes

A synchronic-diachronic genre study

 | RWTH Aachen University
Law language is a cover-term for different genres of legal texts. The genre of law is characterized as being written, legislative and formal. Quantitative studies on the textual and linguistic structure of Old English (oe) law-codes are lacking so far, but both aspects are analysed in this paper on the basis of a corpus of about 20,000 words. The results of the quantitative-qualitative analysis are compared to oe wills on the one hand, and to Early Modern English (emode) and Present-Day English (pde) statutes on the other. The synchronic comparison of oe law-codes and oe wills reveals that the text structure and the linguistic profile of the genres are very similar. The conclusion to be drawn from this result is that genre properties largely determine the textual and linguistic profile of texts in a given period. The diachronic comparisons show marked differences in the linguistic profile of oe law-codes and statutes of later periods.
Keywords: legal language, Old English law-codes, Old English wills, Present-Day English statutes, qualitative interpretation, quantitative analysis
Article outline
  • 1.Legal English as a research topic in corpus linguistics
  • 2.Earlier studies on English legal writing
  • 3.Old English law-codes
  • 4.Aim and structure
  • 5.Corpus and research method
  • 6.Corpus analysis
    • 6.1Text/discourse structure
      • 6.1.1The identification of the legislator
      • 6.1.2The provisions
      • 6.1.3The optional part
    • 6.2Linguistic features
      • 6.2.1Sentence length
      • 6.2.2Sentence structure
        • 6.2.2.1The number of clauses per sentence
        • 6.2.2.2Frequency and types of subordinate clauses
      • 6.2.3The verbal syntagm
        • 6.2.3.1Tense
        • 6.2.3.2Mood
        • 6.2.3.3Modality
        • 6.2.3.4Voice
  • 7.Comparisons
    • 7.1 oe law-codes and oe wills
      • 7.1.1Text/discourse structure
      • 7.1.2Linguistic features
        • 7.1.2.1Sentence length
        • 7.1.2.2Sentence structure
        • 7.1.2.3The verbal syntagm
    • 7.2 oe law-codes and statutes of later periods
      • 7.2.1Text/discourse structure
      • 7.2.2Linguistic features
        • 7.2.2.1Sentence length
        • 7.2.2.2Sentence structure/complexity
        • 7.2.2.3The verbal syntagm
  • 8.Summary and conclusion
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 28 August 2020
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/jhp.00035.moe
References (44)
References
Attenborough, Frederick L. 1963 [1922]. The Laws of the Earliest English Kings. New York: Russel & Russell, Inc. [1922 edition: Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.]Google Scholar
Bhatia, Vijay K. 1993. Analysing Genre: Language Use in Professional Settings. Harlow: Pearson Education Ltd.Google Scholar
1987. “Language of the law”. Language Teaching 20 (4): 227–234. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bhatia, Vijay K., Nicola M. Langton and Jane Lung. 2004. “Legal Discourse: Opportunities and Threats for Corpus Linguistics”. In Ulla Connor and Thomas A. Upton (eds), Discourse in the Professions: Perspectives from Corpus Linguistics, 201–231. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Biel, Łucja. 2010. “Corpus-based Studies of Legal Language for Translation Purposes: Methodological and Practical Potential”. In Carmen Heine and Jan Engberg (eds), Reconceptualizing LSP: Online Proceedings of the XVII European Symposium 2009, no pagination. Aarhus: Aarhus University.Google Scholar
Charrow, Veda, Jo Ann Crandall and Robert Charrow. 1982. “Characteristics and Functions of Legal Language”. In Richard Kittredge and John Lehrberger (eds), Sublanguage: Studies of Language in Restricted Semantic Domains, 175–190. Berlin and New York: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Crystal, David and Derek Davy. 1969. Investigating English Style. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Danet, Brenda. 1985. “Legal Discourse”. In Teun A. van Dijk (ed.), Handbook of Discourse Analysis, 273–291. (Volume 11.) London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Danet, Brenda and Bryna Bogoch. 1992a. “From Oral Ceremony to Written Documents: The Transitional Language of the Anglo-Saxon Wills”. Language and Communication 12 (2): 95–127. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1992b. “‘Whoever Alters This, May God Turn His Face from Him on the Day of Judgment’: Curses in Anglo-Saxon Legal Documents”. Journal of American Folklore 105/416: 132–165. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1994. “Orality, Literacy, and Performativity in Anglo-Saxon Wills”. In John Gibbons (ed.), Language and the Law, 100–135. London and New York: Longman.Google Scholar
Denison, David. 1993. English Historical Syntax: Verbal Constructions. London and New York: Longman.Google Scholar
Diani, Giuliana. 2001. “Modality and Speech Acts in English Acts of Parliament”. In Maurizio Gotti and Marina Dossena (eds), Modality in Specialized Discourse, 175–191. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Drout, Michael. 2000. “Anglo-Saxon Wills and the Inheritance of Tradition in the English Benedictine Reform”. Selim 101: 3–53.Google Scholar
Fanego, Teresa, Paula Rodríguez-Puente, María José López-Couso, Belén Méndez-Naya, Paloma Núñez-Pertejo, Cristina Blanco-García and Iván Tamaredo. 2017. “The Corpus of Historical English Law Reports 1535–1999 (CHELAR): A Resource for Analysing the Development of English Legal Discourse”. ICAME Journal 411: 53–82. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Finegan, Edward. 1982. “Form and Function in Testament Language”. In Robert J. Di Pietro (ed.), Linguistics and the Professions: Proceedings of the Second Annual Delaware Symposium on Language Studies, 113–120. Norwood, New Jersey: Ablex Publishing Corporation.Google Scholar
Fischer, Olga. 1992. “Syntax”. In Norman Blake (ed.), The Cambridge History of the English Language. Vol. II. 1066–1476, 207–408. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Gotti, Maurizio. 2001. “Semantic and Pragmatic Values of Shall and Will in Early Modern English Statutes”. In Maurizio Gotti and Marina Dossena (eds), Modality in Specialized Texts, 89–111. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Gustafsson, Marita. 1975. Some Syntactic Properties of English Law Language. Turku: University of Turku, Finland.Google Scholar
Helsinki Corpus of English Texts, The. 1991. Department of Modern Languages, University of Helsinki.Google Scholar
Hiltunen, Risto. 1990. Chapters on Legal English: Aspects Past and Present of the Language of the Law. Helsinki: Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia.Google Scholar
. 2001. “’Some Syntactic Properties of English Law Language’: Twenty-five Years after Gustafsson (1975)”. In Risto Hiltunen, Keith Battarbee, Matti Peikola and Sanna-Kaisa Tanskanen (eds), English in Zigs and Zags: A Festschrift for Marita Gustafsson, 53–66. Anglicana Turkuensia 23. Turku: University of Turku.Google Scholar
. 2012. “The Grammar and Structure of Legal Texts”. In Peter M. Tiersma and Laurence M. Solan (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Language and Law, 39–51. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Karlsson, Fred. 2009. “Origin and Maintenance of Clausal Embedding Complexity”. In Geoffrey Sampson, David Gil and Peter Trudgill (eds), Language Complexity as an Evolving Variable, 192–202. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kurzon, Dennis. 1997. “‘Legal Language’: Varieties, Genres, Registers, Discourses”. International Journal of Applied Linguistics 7 (2): 119–139. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lehto, Anu. 2015. The Genre of Early Modern English Statutes: Complexity in Historical Legal Language. Helsinki: Mémoires de la Société Néophilologique de Helsinki XCVII.Google Scholar
Liebermann, Felix. 1903–16. Die Gesetze der Angelsachsen [‘The Laws of the Anglo-Saxons’]. Halle: Max Niemeyer.Google Scholar
Mellinkoff, David. 1963. The Language of the Law. Boston, Massachusetts: Little, Brown and Company.Google Scholar
Moessner, Lilo. 2010. “Directive Speech Acts: A Cross-generic Diachronic Study”. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 11 (2): 219–249. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2018. “Old English Wills: A Genre Study”. In Peter Petré, Hubert Cuyckens and Frauke D’hoedt (eds), Sociocultural Dimensions of Lexis and Text in the History of English, 103–124. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mustanoja, Tauno F. 1960. A Middle English Syntax. Helsinki: Société Néophilologique.Google Scholar
Rissanen, Matti. 2000. “Standardization and the Language of Early Statutes”. In Laura Wright (ed.), The Development of Standard English 1300–1800, 117–130. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sawyer, Peter (ed.). 1957. “Textus Roffensis, Part 1”. In Bertram Colgrave, Kemp Malone and Knud Schibsbye (eds), Early English Manuscripts in Facsimile. (Volume VII1.) Copenhagen: Rosenkilde and Bagger.Google Scholar
Schmid, Reinhold. 1832. Die Gesetze der Angelsachsen [‘The Laws of the Anglo-Saxons’]. Leipzig: Brockhaus.Google Scholar
Schwyter, Jürg R. 1996. Old English Legal Language: The Lexical Field of Theft. Odense: Odense University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Scotto di Carlo, Giuseppina. 2015. Diachronic and Synchronic Aspects of Legal English: Past, Present, and Possible Future of Legal English. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar
Sheehan, Michael M. 1963. The Will in Medieval England. Rome: Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies.Google Scholar
Thorpe, Benjamin. 1840. Ancient Laws and Institutes of England, London: Eyre and Spottiswoode.Google Scholar
Tiersma, Peter M. 1999. Legal Language. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Tollerton, Linda. 2011. Wills and Will-Making in Anglo-Saxon England. Woodbridge: York Medieval Press and Boydell & Brewer Ltd.Google Scholar
Trosborg, Anna. 1995. “Statutes and Contracts: An Analysis of Legal Speech Acts in the English Language of the Law”. Journal of Pragmatics 231: 31–53. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Whitelock, Dorothy. 1968. English Historical Documents c. 500–1042. London: Eyre & Spottiswoode.Google Scholar
Williams, Christopher. 2004. “Pragmatic and Cross-Cultural Considerations in Translating Verbal Constructions in Prescriptive Legal Texts in English and Italian”. In Christopher N. Candlin and Maurizio Gotti (eds), Intercultural Discourse in Domain-Specific English, special issue of Textus 17 (1): 217–46. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
. 2005. Tradition and Change in Legal English: Verbal Constructions in Prescriptive Texts. Bern: Peter Lang. DOI logoGoogle Scholar