Reading the excerpts of last fall's discussion of legal writing
reminds me that I meant to pass along two references:
Goldfarb, Ronald L. and James C. Raymond, CLEAR UNDERSTANDINGS: A
GUIDE TO LEGAL WRITING. Tuscaloosa, AL: Goldenray, 1982. [Perhaps
there is a more recent edition as this is a very popular book; Jim
Raymond has spent a lot of time teaching Canadian judges, by the
way.]
Perrin, Timothy. BETTER WRITING FOR LAWYERS. Toronto: Law Society
of Upper Canada, 1990. This one is written by a lawyer who took Anne
Hungerford's advanced writing course and read both her text and
mine--and them applied what he had learned to what he knew about
legal writing. [Technically, some parts of it are probably
plagiared, but then imitation is said to be the sincerest form of
flattery.
Let me add that I think there are two aspects to teaching
lawyers how to write, only one of which the law schools care much
about. The first is teaching law students to enter the discourse
community of lawyers, i.e., to write for lawyers and judges as
lawyers and judges wish to be written to. The second, often
associated with the 'plain language' movement, is teaching lawyers
(and would-be lawyers) how to write about legal matters for ordinary
folks (i.e., for those outside the discourse community of the law).
Morally and politically, I'm not sure it is right to teach only the
first. So let me add another reference (at least):
PROCEEDINGS: JUST LANGUAGE CONFERENCE (Vancouver), 1992. [This
includes a very interesting piece by Angus Reid, "Who is Readying
Anyway? A Psychographic Profile of Canadians," which should be of
considerable interest to all CASLL teachers of reading/writing, I
think.] With some luck, most Canadian university libraries should
have this.
