Can contracts be both plain and precise?
- Siebörger, Ian, Adendorff, Ralph D
- Authors: Siebörger, Ian , Adendorff, Ralph D
- Date: 2012
- Language: English
- Type: text , article
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10962/123299 , vital:35425 , https://doi.org/10.2989/16073614.2011.651944
- Description: One argument against the use of plain language in legal documents is that it is impossible to convey legal meanings in plain language with the same precision as in specialist legal discourse (Hunt, 2003). We tested this claim by redrafting an extract from a lease agreement into plain English in three stages, producing three versions of the extract in progressively plainer English. We submitted these with the original lease agreement to a senior advocate to elicit his opinion on whether the plain-language versions of the extract are equivalent to the original in legal force. Various differences between the versions are analysed using lexical semantics and Systemic Functional Grammar (as described in Halliday & Matthiessen, 2004). This analysis reveals that the redrafted versions could easily be altered to eliminate the difference between them and the original extract, and that ‘plain language’ as conceived by redrafters of official documents may be easy for non-experts to read, but more difficult for experts. This demonstrates that a ‘one-size-fits-all’ approach to readability is often not tenable, and that plain-language activists can learn much from research (such as Street, 1993) which asserts the existence of a plurality of literacies.
- Full Text:
- Authors: Siebörger, Ian , Adendorff, Ralph D
- Date: 2012
- Language: English
- Type: text , article
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10962/123299 , vital:35425 , https://doi.org/10.2989/16073614.2011.651944
- Description: One argument against the use of plain language in legal documents is that it is impossible to convey legal meanings in plain language with the same precision as in specialist legal discourse (Hunt, 2003). We tested this claim by redrafting an extract from a lease agreement into plain English in three stages, producing three versions of the extract in progressively plainer English. We submitted these with the original lease agreement to a senior advocate to elicit his opinion on whether the plain-language versions of the extract are equivalent to the original in legal force. Various differences between the versions are analysed using lexical semantics and Systemic Functional Grammar (as described in Halliday & Matthiessen, 2004). This analysis reveals that the redrafted versions could easily be altered to eliminate the difference between them and the original extract, and that ‘plain language’ as conceived by redrafters of official documents may be easy for non-experts to read, but more difficult for experts. This demonstrates that a ‘one-size-fits-all’ approach to readability is often not tenable, and that plain-language activists can learn much from research (such as Street, 1993) which asserts the existence of a plurality of literacies.
- Full Text:
The role of APPRAISAL in the NRF rating system: an analysis of Judgement and appreciation in peer reviewers' reports
- Marshall, Christine, Adendorff, Ralph D, De Klerk, Vivian A
- Authors: Marshall, Christine , Adendorff, Ralph D , De Klerk, Vivian A
- Date: 2010
- Subjects: To be catalogued
- Language: English
- Type: text , article
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10962/469348 , vital:77234 , https://doi.org/10.2989/SALALS.2009.27.4.3.1023
- Description: This research is based on analyses of a corpus of reviewers' reports that were elicited for the purposes of assessing South African researchers who have applied for a rating from the National Research Foundation (NRF). Such ratings are highly sought-after by South African researchers as a form of official affirmation and recognition of research expertise, which brings with it scholarly accolades and the opportunity to access national research funds. The article is a pilot study which explores the use of evaluative language in the reports and tries to make explicit the kinds of linguistic resources exploited by reviewers when making evaluations, and the way in which their linguistic choices influence the intuitive judgments made by the panel of assessors when allocating ratings based on the reports. The ultimate aim in the larger research project is to explicate the relationship between the types of evaluative language used and the rating allocated, which will give some indication of the reliability and validity of the NRF Rating System. The interpretive framework used is the APPRAISAL system (Martin, 2000; Martin and Rose, 2003; Martin and White, 2005), with a specific focus on Judgement (evaluation of behaviour) and Appreciation (evaluation of things). The system lends itself to a rigorous analysis of linguistic data, and offers a way to strengthen the reliability of the rating assessments of the NRF.
- Full Text:
- Authors: Marshall, Christine , Adendorff, Ralph D , De Klerk, Vivian A
- Date: 2010
- Subjects: To be catalogued
- Language: English
- Type: text , article
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10962/469348 , vital:77234 , https://doi.org/10.2989/SALALS.2009.27.4.3.1023
- Description: This research is based on analyses of a corpus of reviewers' reports that were elicited for the purposes of assessing South African researchers who have applied for a rating from the National Research Foundation (NRF). Such ratings are highly sought-after by South African researchers as a form of official affirmation and recognition of research expertise, which brings with it scholarly accolades and the opportunity to access national research funds. The article is a pilot study which explores the use of evaluative language in the reports and tries to make explicit the kinds of linguistic resources exploited by reviewers when making evaluations, and the way in which their linguistic choices influence the intuitive judgments made by the panel of assessors when allocating ratings based on the reports. The ultimate aim in the larger research project is to explicate the relationship between the types of evaluative language used and the rating allocated, which will give some indication of the reliability and validity of the NRF Rating System. The interpretive framework used is the APPRAISAL system (Martin, 2000; Martin and Rose, 2003; Martin and White, 2005), with a specific focus on Judgement (evaluation of behaviour) and Appreciation (evaluation of things). The system lends itself to a rigorous analysis of linguistic data, and offers a way to strengthen the reliability of the rating assessments of the NRF.
- Full Text:
Educated mother-tongue South African English: A corpus approach
- Adendorff, Ralph D, De Klerk, Vivian A, De Vos, Mark A, Hunt, Sally, Simango, Silvester R, Todd, Louise, Niesler, Thomas
- Authors: Adendorff, Ralph D , De Klerk, Vivian A , De Vos, Mark A , Hunt, Sally , Simango, Silvester R , Todd, Louise , Niesler, Thomas
- Date: 2008
- Language: English
- Type: text , article
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10962/124352 , vital:35597 , https://doi.org/10.1080/10228190608566261
- Description: South Africa is anecdotally known for its complex system of speech varieties correlating with variables such as ethnicity, first language, class and education. These intuitions (e.g. Lass 1990) require further investigation, especially in the context of a changing South Africa where language variety plays a key role in identifying social, economic and ethnic group membership. Thus, in this research, the extent to which these variables play a role in variety is explored using a corpus approach (the nature of class and race in the corpus is discussed more fully later in the article). The corpus project, focusing primarily on accent, has been undertaken by members of the Department of English Language and Linguistics at Rhodes University in South Africa, collaborating with staff from the Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering from Stellenbosch University, South Africa. A corpus (the first of its kind) is being compiled, comprising the speech of educated, white, mother-tongue speakers of South African English (as distinct from Afrikaans English, Indian English, and the second language (L2) varieties of English used by speakers of indigenous African languages), and data collection is well under way. This short article aims to describe the aims of the project, and the methodological approach which underpins it, as well as to highlight some of the more problematic aspects of the research.
- Full Text:
- Authors: Adendorff, Ralph D , De Klerk, Vivian A , De Vos, Mark A , Hunt, Sally , Simango, Silvester R , Todd, Louise , Niesler, Thomas
- Date: 2008
- Language: English
- Type: text , article
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10962/124352 , vital:35597 , https://doi.org/10.1080/10228190608566261
- Description: South Africa is anecdotally known for its complex system of speech varieties correlating with variables such as ethnicity, first language, class and education. These intuitions (e.g. Lass 1990) require further investigation, especially in the context of a changing South Africa where language variety plays a key role in identifying social, economic and ethnic group membership. Thus, in this research, the extent to which these variables play a role in variety is explored using a corpus approach (the nature of class and race in the corpus is discussed more fully later in the article). The corpus project, focusing primarily on accent, has been undertaken by members of the Department of English Language and Linguistics at Rhodes University in South Africa, collaborating with staff from the Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering from Stellenbosch University, South Africa. A corpus (the first of its kind) is being compiled, comprising the speech of educated, white, mother-tongue speakers of South African English (as distinct from Afrikaans English, Indian English, and the second language (L2) varieties of English used by speakers of indigenous African languages), and data collection is well under way. This short article aims to describe the aims of the project, and the methodological approach which underpins it, as well as to highlight some of the more problematic aspects of the research.
- Full Text:
- «
- ‹
- 1
- ›
- »