Literacy ‘luddites’

Not all the comments about the bulletins and plain English are favourable. (Attachment ‘G’) There are a few literary ‘luddites’ - those who think the principles are fine but still write to clients in the traditional way because they believe they expect it. One lawyer informed me that using ‘borrower’ and ‘lender’ instead of ‘mortgagor’ and ‘mortgagee’ was subversive. Another accused me of ‘dumbing down’ the richness of the English language and that the ‘legal precept of stare decisis has a gravitas beyond simplifying language’. I told him that I needed both an ordinary and legal dictionary to understand what he meant. Donning my teachers’ hat I asked him to pretend that I was a non-law person, namely a client, and explain what he meant - in plain English. I’m still waiting for an answer.

‘Pep’ talks

Miss Spelt hasn’t done it alone. Her knight in shining plain English armour, Chris Balmford came to the rescue.⁴³ If the literary luddites couldn’t be swayed by Miss Spelt, Chris, a well known plain English consultant to Australian law firms, helped drive the momentum by giving ‘pep’ talks to all the Firm’s offices. His first impressions of each office was the friendly, bright and perhaps somewhat unconventional atmosphere. Instead of Dickensian dark wood and dusty legal tomes, there were bright light, sunlight and warmth.

But when it came to writing Chris encouraged the lawyers to question whether they presented a similar warmth and friendliness in their documents and letters. So they’re now letting the sunshine into their writing as well as through the windows. And they are now as careful about the impression of their writing as their dressing style. The ‘voice of the brand’ in Sparke Helmore writing is beginning to live up to its visual presentation.⁴⁴

EMAIL

Email improves legal writing

Email communication has improved legal discourse. Lawyers should not fear its apparent informality – it’s extending the language’s stylistic range in interesting and motivating ways.⁴⁵ Like plain English it should result in an enhanced understanding and accessibility rather than a ‘dumbing down’ of legal language.

Messages go out more quickly than it takes to dial a telephone number. Lawyers may be involved in a conversation by way of email comprising a dozen, or so, responses within a single hour.⁴⁶ Those who type with two fingers can send messages with deplorable spelling mistakes. And even when they remember to use the Spell and Grammar Checker there’s the chance of referring to a judge who is well versed in ‘constipation’ rather than the ‘constitution’. Even the NSW Director of Public Prosecutions has been criticised for sending to the victim in a sexual assault case an email that was not spell checked and contained numerous grammatical errors.⁴⁷