Advertisement

Legal Latin’s Legacy in Modern Languages and Systems of Law

  • Roger S. FisherEmail author
Reference work entry

Abstract

Legal terms that have a Latinate origin are so prevalent in the modern world that virtually every legal practitioner makes some use of them in writing or speaking about the law. The lingering legacy of this “Legal Latin” is a complex sociolinguistic phenomenon. While tradition, colonialism, and elitism are the conventional explanations for the continuing prevalence of Legal Latin in specific legal cultures or jurisdictions, they do not offer a sufficient account for the persistence of the language in the modern world. The best explanation may simply be that Legal Latin has always flourished in a multilingual environment, whether the Roman Empire, Renaissance Europe, the Holy Roman Empire and its successor (the European Union), or the modern world of globalization and international institutions.

Keywords

Legal sociolinguistics Jurilinguistics Loan translations Calques Comparative law 

References

  1. Adams, J. N. (2003). Bilingualism and the Latin language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Borja Albi, A., & Fernando, P. R. (2013). Legal translation in context: Professional issues and prospects. Oxford: Peter Lang.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bar, S. (1999). La question des langues au sein des Nations Unis. In H. Guillorel & G. Koubi (Eds.), Langues de droits: Langues du droit, droit des langues (pp. 291–316). Bruxelles: Bruylant.Google Scholar
  4. Bussani, M., & Mattei, U. (Eds.). (2012). The Cambridge companion to comparative law. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Curran, V. G. (2002). Comparative law: An introduction. Durham: Carolina Academic Press.Google Scholar
  6. De Cruz, P. (2007). Comparative law in a changing world (3rd ed.). London: Routledge-Cavendish.Google Scholar
  7. Derrett, J. D. M. (1959). The role of Roman law and continental laws in India. Zeitschrift für ausländisches und internationales Privatrecht, 24(4), 657–685.Google Scholar
  8. Duhaime’s International Law Dictionary. (n.d.). http://www.duhaime.org/LegalDictionary/Category/InternationalLawDictionary.aspx. Accessed 29 Mar 2016.
  9. Fellmeth, A. X., & Horwitz, M. (2009). Guide to Latin in international law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gray, J. (2006). Lawyer’s Latin: A Valde Mecum. London: Robert Hale.Google Scholar
  11. Hanson, M. (1987). The influence of French law on the legal development of Saudi Arabia Arab law. Law Quarterly, 2(3), 272–291.Google Scholar
  12. Harding, A. (2002). Global doctrine and local knowledge: Law in South East Asia. The International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 51(1), 35–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Harry, R. L. (1997). Development of a language for international law: The experience of Esperanto. In H. Tonkin (Ed.), Esperanto, interlinguistics, and planned language (pp. 173–182). Lanham: University Press America.Google Scholar
  14. Lamalle, S. (2014). Multilevel translation analysis of a key legal concept: Persona juris and legal pluralism. In Le Cheng, Anne Wagner, and King Kui Sin, the Ashgate handbook of legal translation (pp. 299–312). Burlington: Ashgate Publishing.Google Scholar
  15. Llopis, M. Á. O. (2007). The untranslatability of law? Lexical differences in Spanish and American contract law. European Journal of English Studies, 11(1), 17–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Mallat, C. (2007). Introduction to middle eastern law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Mattila, H. E. S. (2002). De aequalitate latinitatis jurisperitorum: The use of legal Latin in the major contemporary legal families with reference to specialist dictionaries. Revue internationale de droit comparé, 54(3), 717–758.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Mattila, H. E. S. (2013). Comparative legal linguistics: Language of law, Latin and modern Lingua Francas (2nd ed.). Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  19. Mayrand, A. (2007). In M. M. Aodha (Ed.), Dictionnaire de maximes et locutions latines utilisées en droit (4th ed.). Cowansville: Les Éditions Yvonne Blais.Google Scholar
  20. McLeod, P. R. (1997–1998). Latin in legal writing: An inquiry into the use of Latin in the modern legal world. Boston College Law Review, 39(1), 235–251.Google Scholar
  21. Mellinkoff, D. (2004). The language of the law. Eugene: Resource Publications.Google Scholar
  22. Ng, K. H. (2009). The common law in two voices: Language, law, and the postcolonial dilemma in Hong Kong. Stanford: Stanford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Ostler, N. (2007). Ad infinitum: A biography of Latin. New York: Walker and Company.Google Scholar
  24. Pargendler, M. (2012). The rise and decline of legal families. The American Journal of Comparative Law, 60(4), 1043–1074.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Popescu-Mihut, E. (1981). Contributions to the study of Latin words in Byzantine juridical literature. Revue des études sud-est européennes, 19(3), 433–441.Google Scholar
  26. Powers, D. S. (2010). Wael B. Hallaq on the origins of Islamic law: A review essay. Islamic Law and Society, 17(1), 126–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Pozzo, B. (2006). Multilingualism, legal terminology and the problems of harmonizing European private law. In B. Pozzo & V. Jacometti (Eds.), Multilingualism and the harmonisation of European law (pp. 3–19). The Hague: Kluwer Law International.Google Scholar
  28. Ristikivi, M. (2005). Latin: The common legal language of Europe? Juridica International, 10, 199–202.Google Scholar
  29. Ristikivi, M. (2007). Polysemy and synonymy of Latin terms in Estonian legal language. Eesti Rakenduslingvistika Űhingu aastaraamat/Estonian Papers in Applied Linguistics, 3, 253–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Ristikivi, M. (2009). Latin terms in civil law: Original textbooks in Estonian versus translated textbooks. Eesti Rakenduslingvistika Űhingu aastaraamat/Estonian Papers in Applied Linguistics, 5, 225–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Šarčević, S. (1997). New approach to legal translation. The Hague: Kluwer Law International.Google Scholar
  32. Schacht, J. (1950). Foreign elements in ancient Islamic law. Journal of Comparative Legislation and International Law, 3rd series, 32(3/4), 9–17.Google Scholar
  33. Socanac, L. (2010). Transference in Croatian law. Linguistic Insights: Studies in Language and Communication, 117, 109–130.Google Scholar
  34. Tiersma, P. M. (1999). Legal language. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  35. Tiersma, P. M., & Solan, L. M. (Eds.). (2012). The Oxford handbook of language and law. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  36. Verhas, C. (1998). The lawyers’ Latin: Legal dictionaries from a historical perspective. Verslagen en Mededelingen van de Koninklije Academie voor Nederlandse Taal- en Letterkunde, 108(2–3), 347–369.Google Scholar
  37. Warnke, I. (2003). Juristische Terminologisierung und Entterminologisierung zwischen 1500 und 1800. Sprachwissenschaft, 28(3), 355–371.Google Scholar
  38. Wieacker, F. (1981). The importance of Roman law for western civilization and western legal thought. Boston College International & Comparative Law Review, 4(2), 257.Google Scholar
  39. Zajtay, I., & Hosten, W. J. (1969). The permanence of Roman law concepts in the continental legal systems: With an addendum on the permanence of Roman law concepts in South African law. The Comparative and International Law Journal of Southern Africa, 2(2), 181–205.Google Scholar
  40. Zimmerman, R. (2004). Roman law and the harmonization of private law in Europe. In A. S. Hartkamp et al. (Eds.), Towards a European civil code (3rd ed., pp. 21–42). The Hague: Ars Aequi Libri.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of HumanitiesYork UniversityTorontoCanada

Personalised recommendations