Peculiarities of enhancing Legal English vocabulary



The significance of vocabulary in ESP is unspoken, and so are the distinctive features of its teaching and acquisition. Overlooking its characteristics might pose a challenge in the educational process, constraining vocabulary teaching opportunities. Vocabulary learning does not happen instantaneously, as it is an incremental process, thus, this paper introduces salient features of teaching legal English vocabulary. Furthermore, it contributes to methodology, providing different types of vocabulary teaching methods in compliance with the features inherent in legal English. The paper aims to study the peculiarities that are characteristic in teaching the lexis of legal English to international law students.

Keywords: English for Legal Purposes, English for Specific Purposes, Legal English vocabulary, Legal English teaching methods, vocabulary teaching methods.

Introduction

English as an international language has an unspeakable influence on a myriad of spheres, such as medicine, law, business, tourism, engineering, and so on. Having English as a leading language affected a prevalence of diverse English for Specific Purposes (ESP) branches, for instance, English for Medical Purposes (EMP), English for Vocational Purposes (EVP), English for Business Purposes (EBP), English for Legal Purposes (ELP). ELP as one of the fields of ESP has been gaining ground in pedagogy, as instructors are pursuing effective approaches to teaching legal English. Compared to General English (GE), legal English is not confined to “regular”, and “common to everyone” vocabulary, but rather is abundant with domain lexis which makes it abstruse to comprehend. Instructing vocabulary, particularly in ESP courses, poses a growing challenge for English language educators. Vocabulary stands as an integral component of any syllabus, requiring systematic and thoughtfully scheduled instruction. It is crucial to meticulously select which vocabulary to impart and determine the appropriate approach or activities for effective student comprehension. Given the pivotal role vocabulary holds in ESP courses, it is imperative to identify strategies that guarantee effective teaching and learning tailored to specific learner groups. Over the years, various approaches, methods, and techniques have been utilized, and thus, studied to aid learners in acquiring English for Specific Purposes. Furthermore, the instruction of specialized vocabulary to ESP learners has been a consistent concern throughout the history of ESP and language education. Studies devoted to teaching vocabulary in ESP have showcased a wide array of methods, approaches, and techniques that might contribute to acquiring specific vocabulary. In this article, we begin by summarizing prior studies on discipline-specific vocabulary, highlighting the difficulties linked to identifying and choosing appropriate vocabulary. Then, we outline various methods appropriate for facilitating the acquisition of diverse facets of word knowledge in a language learning setting.

Literature review

Features of ESP

ESP is implemented across diverse sectors and environments, spanning business, medicine, law, psychology, and finance, among others. By focusing on ESP, learners enhance their ability to communicate proficiently within their respective fields, thereby enhancing their employment prospects and opportunities for career progression. Learning English for specific purposes offers several benefits. It enables learners to master the specialized language used in their profession, fostering confidence and effectiveness in communication. Additionally, ESP equips learners to stay abreast of industry developments and innovations, making its graduates competitive in the international labor market.

Pursuant to Hutchinson & Waters (1987), ESP is characterized as an instructional approach where content and methodology choices are guided by learners’ specific purposes for learning. Dudley-Evans (1998) revealed further absolute characteristics inherent in teaching ESP, such as:

1. ESP is delineated as catering to the particular requirements of the learners.
2. ESP utilizes the foundational methodology and activities relevant to the discipline it addresses.
3. ESP focuses on the language pertinent to these activities in terms of grammar, vocabulary, style, learning strategies, communication patterns, and textual forms.

Drawing on the studies conducted by linguists in this field, the following common denominators can be outlined: authenticity, purpose-built concept, and self-directedness.

Vocabulary for ESP

Teaching vocabulary, particularly in specialized English courses, is increasingly difficult for English language instructors. Vocabulary forms an integral component of any curriculum, and it requires structured and consistent teaching methods. Careful consideration is needed when selecting which vocabulary to teach and determining the most effective approach and activities for imparting it to students. McCarthy (1990) ascertained “No matter how well the student learns grammar, no matter how successfully the sounds of L2 are mastered, without words to express a wider range of meanings, communication in an L2 just cannot happen in any meaningful way”. In the view of the aforementioned, the role of vocabulary in ESP appears to be indispensable. Subsequently, it is noteworthy to mention the categories the ESP vocabulary has been broken into, summarizing antecedent research (Dudley-Evans and St. John, 1998; Hutchinson and Waters, 1987; McCarthy, 1990; Nation, 2001):

1. General vocabulary — it consists of words and phrases pervasive in everyday use among both laymen and particular field specialists.
2. Semi-technical vocabulary — vocabulary commonly found in everyday language but occurs more frequently in specialized and technical settings and discourses.
3. Technical vocabulary — a vocabulary that is dedicated to a specific area of expertise and has rather limited meanings that differ according to the field of use. As it was enshrined in Chung, T., & Nation, I. S. P. (2004), it is responsible for 20–30 percent of words in specialized texts.
4. Academic vocabulary — words and phrases commonly found in academic texts and lectures, including those related to research, analysis, and argumentation. Academic Word List by Coxhead (2000) is one of the most acknowledged pieces of work that includes academic vocabulary with its range of occurrence in texts.
5. Functional vocabulary — words and phrases utilized to perform specific language functions, such as giving instructions, making requests, or expressing opinions.

McCarthy (1990) and Widdowson (1983) consolidated the terms of “core” and “non-core” vocabulary. As the term “core” implies, core vocabulary pertains to words that are commonly used and hold greater importance within the language compared to others. Whereas, subject-specific vocabulary should be categorized as non-core due to its lack of neutrality and its connection to a specialized subject matter (Carter, 1988).

Furthermore, in compliance with Nation (2013), vocabulary can be categorized according to its occurrence. There are three tiers of frequency-based words: high-frequency, mid-frequency, and low-frequency words. High-frequency words are those that appear frequently in written and spoken language across various contexts. They are commonly encountered in day-to-day communication and are essential for basic language proficiency. Low-frequency words are those that are uncommon in written and spoken language. These words are less frequently encountered in everyday communication and may be more specialized or less commonly used compared to high-frequency words. Low-frequency words often represent more complex concepts, technical terminology, or uncommon vocabulary. Mid-frequency vocabulary refers to words that appear with modest frequency both in written and spoken language. These words fall between high-frequency words, which are very common, and low-frequency words, which are relatively rare. Mid-frequency vocabulary includes terms that are encountered somewhat regularly in communication but are not as pervasive as high-frequency words. However, as the proverb says “One person’s technical vocabulary is another person’s low-frequency word”, so the level of word frequency is dependent on the underlying setting (Nation, 2001). At this juncture, high-frequency words of a certain field of ESP are advocated to pay higher attention, allocating more time, as they are encountered repeatedly, as opposed to low-frequency vocabulary. Inasmuch, as low-frequency words do not tend to occur often and, by and large, are regarded as “complicated to remember”, Nation (2001) recommends instructors to help students with acquiring them as they come up, not drawing extra attention.

Features of Legal English

Legal language is defined as the language used to carry specific purposes. As with any other branch of ESP, English for Legal Purposes (ELP) is distinguished by a number of characteristics, including a specific range of words, grammar structures, terminology, and a necessity for a high level of learners among others. However, the hallmark that is inherent in exclusively legal language is that it is internally linked to a national legal system. Subsequently, terminology and vocabulary depend on the country or countries the language is used. There are some syntactic features that appear in legal English, spanning “wordiness” (Mellinkoff, 1963), vigorous use of “shall” (Adams, 2011; Eagleson and Asprey, 1989; Garner, 2012), extensive use of Passive voice (Garner, 2011) among others.

Legal English vocabulary

Vocabulary is the overriding aspect that any ESP branch incorporates, as well as it is the most distinctive hallmark of ESP courses. Veretina (2012) emphasized primary elements of legal English vocabulary, including obscure language, specialized terminology, synonyms, loanwords, and word repetition. All of the mentioned factors could potentially contribute to the complication of initial vocabulary comprehension, as language undergoes continuous evolution, resulting in the removal and addition of vocabulary over time. In relation to that it is worth pointing out the main characteristics pertaining to legal English vocabulary:

a) a plethora of technical or specialized terms and phrases that are utilized purely in legal contexts (jurisdiction, distraint, plaintiff, tort, and indemnity). In view of the aforementioned, there are also semi-technical words that legal specialists encounter on a daily basis (action, suit, proceedings, hand — in the meaning of “signature”, etc.).

b) Choice of words pertaining to a higher register and legal genre which is intolerable to ambiguity (“initiate” instead of “start”, “deem” instead of “consider”)

c) unduly use of pronominal adverbs (herein, whereof, herewith, etc.);

d) complex prepositions (“in the event of” instead of “if”, “by virtue of” instead of “by”)

e) abundance of foreign words derived from Latin and French (admonished, supreme, legis, per se, etc.);

f) binomials (signed and sealed, cause and effect, breaking and entering, assault and battery, etc.).

g) nominalization — utilizing nouns instead of verbs and adjectives, in some cases, involves transforming them into nouns (to amend — amendment, to terminate — termination, to execute — execution, etc.)

h) archaic language (whilst, witnesseth and showeth)

Principles of effective vocabulary teaching

The learners of English are predominantly aware of the difficulties that scarcity of vocabulary leads to. It primarily adversely affects the effectiveness of speaking performance, as lexical units are responsible for fulfilling the fundamental body of information of meanings that are anticipated to be understood and delivered. Graves (2000) suggests significant facets to elevate vocabulary learning, such as reading texts, increasing word consciousness, and teaching specific and independent words and phrases.

There are several bedrock principles that contribute to ameliorating foreign language vocabulary:

1. Contextual vocabulary acquisition: Introducing new words within meaningful contexts helps learners understand their usage and meaning better. In other words, students derive the meaning of the word by encountering it in the process of listening and reading activities.
2. Active engagement: Encouraging active participation through activities such as discussions, games, and practical applications enhances vocabulary acquisition. National Reading Panel (2000) outlines that vocabulary should be taught through students’ direct involvement and suggests learning to be incidental. Bunting (2000) at this point, delineated a wide array of activities to engage students in vocabulary.
3. Repetition and reinforcement: Repeated exposure to new words through various activities and contexts reinforces learning and aids in retention. Saragi et al. (1978) found that repetition and reinforcement of words in a second language helps to retain them in the memory. Moreover, later studies suggest that a person has to encounter and repeat the word at least ten times to consolidate it (Jenkins et al., 1984).
4. Personalization: Connecting vocabulary to learners’ interests, experiences, and goals makes learning more relevant and meaningful. Students will find it more straightforward to remember a word if it is somehow related to them, and aligns with their hobbies, background knowledge, and aspirations.
5. Scaffolded instruction: Gradually building on learners’ existing knowledge and skills, providing support as needed, facilitates vocabulary development. Learners can enhance new vocabulary with support in the form of already familiar words (Vygotsky and Cole, 1978).
6. Brainstorming associations: This principle implies that in order to reinforce vocabulary acquisition learners should create mind maps of words related to each other by meaning. Subsequently, when a word serves as a liaison to several words associated with it.
7. Teaching affixes: Bauer and Nation (1993) mentioned the importance of learning affixes in vocabulary acquisition since they carry a specific meaning. Thus, learning the sense that they bring to a word can significantly enlarge learners’ choice of words.

Revisiting Nation’s (2001) framework concerning prerequisites necessary to acquire English vocabulary, three types of activities emanated as key takeaways:

1. Form-focused activities aim to deepen learners' understanding of word structure, spelling, pronunciation, and usage.
2. Meaning-focused activities prioritize understanding and using words in meaningful contexts, promoting comprehension and retention.
3. Use-focused activities concentrate on the practical application and active use of vocabulary in communicative contexts. These activities aim to develop learners' proficiency in using words accurately, fluently, and appropriately in speaking and writing.

Methods of teaching legal English vocabulary

While there isn't one definitive method for teaching vocabulary, previous research on technical vocabulary has identified several approaches that we deemed appropriate for improving legal English vocabulary.

— As it was previously mentioned, legal language is notorious for an abundance of technical legal vocabulary that mainly appears abstruse. However, limited legal vocabulary might significantly hamper both oral and written communication. As a solution, repetition and reinforcement strategies can contribute to learning legal terminology, making students encounter target words more frequently and, in addition, providing contextual background for the establishment of the meaning. Overall, legal English vocabulary can be taught by means of repetition and contextual teaching methods. For instance, the word “condonation”, which implies conditional forgiveness of a spouse’s marital wrong, should be involved in classroom reading activities and included in classroom discussions as much as possible. The following context can be used to delineate the meaning of the word: “It is evident that the practices prevail because of condonation by superior officers”.

— Nominalization is another feature peculiar among legal professionals. An effective technique for acquiring legal lexis consists of teaching students affixes that occur quite frequently and alleviate the process of vocabulary learning. Thus, the knowledge of suffixes, such as -ment, -ness, and -tion, enables learners to create nouns out of verbs and adjectives. For instance, punishment, imprisonment, indictment, exoneration, restriction, unlawfulness, recklessness, to name a few.

— Legal specialists tend to operate higher register words, such as append, expedite, and commence. This choice of words might require learners to have a higher level of English. However, the scaffolding method can facilitate the acquisition of high-level vocabulary by explaining the meaning of high register words through the words that are already familiar. For example, the commencement of a legal process is the beginning or the start of a legal process.

— Binomial expressions, as a salient trait of legal vocabulary, occur in legal texts quite frequently. Inasmuch, as meanings of the elements are conventionally either synonyms, close in meaning, or antonyms, the method that can be utilized for remembering binomials is brainstorming associations. For example, the multinomial “give, devise, and bequeath” assumes handing property over by will. Linking the words to their meaning might elevate the level of comprehension of this expression, and therefore, remember its elements.

Conclusion

Teaching vocabulary specific to a legal discipline can pose peculiar challenges both for L2 instructors and legal professionals. The paper outlined the characteristics of teaching ESP vocabulary and delineated features inherent in legal English. In pursuit of effective methods of delivering legal vocabulary, the paper has thoroughly demonstrated the various opportunities available to language teachers for delivering Legal English vocabulary considering its salient features. Despite the heterogeneous structure of legal vocabulary that imparts some challenges in its acquisition, the paper shed some light on the methods and techniques we deemed appropriate providing examples of their application.

References:

1. Bauer, L., & Nation, P. (1993). Word families. International journal of Lexicography, 6(4), 253–279.
2. Carter, R. &McCarthy, M. (1988) Vocabulary and Language Teaching. London and NewYork: Longman
3. Chotimah, C., & Astiyandha, T. (2022). Improving students' vocabulary knowledge through race to the board game for esp (english for specific purposes). Lingua, 18(2), 241–251.
4. Chung, T., & Nation, I. S. P. (2004). Identifying technical vocabulary. System, 32, 251–263. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2003.11.008
5. Coxhead, A. (2000). A new academic word list. TESOL quarterly, 34(2), 213–238.
6. Dudley-Evans, T. (1998). An Overview of ESP in the 1990s.
7. Dudley-Evans, T., & St John, M. J. (1998). Developments in English for specific purposes: A multi-disciplinary approach. Cambridge university press.
8. Eagleson, R. D., & Asprey, M. M. (1989). We must abandon» shall». Australian Law Journal, 63(11), 726–728.
9. Garner, B. A. (2011). Garner's dictionary of legal usage. Oxford University Press, USA.
10. Garner, B. A. (2012). What's an Error in Language. ABAJ, 98, 20.
11. Graves, M.F. 2000. A vocabulary program to complement and bolster a middle-grade comprehension program. In B. M. Taylor, M. F. Graves, and P. Van Den Broek (eds.), Reading for meaning: Fostering comprehension in the middle grades. New York: Teachers College Press.
12. Hutchinson, T., & Waters, A. (1987). English for specific purposes. Cambridge university press.
13. Hou, H. I. (2014). Teaching Specialized Vocabulary by Integrating a Corpus-Based Approach: Implications for ESP Course Design at the University Level. English Language Teaching, 7(5), 26–37.
14. Jenkins, J. R., M. L. Stein, and K. Wysocki. 1984. ‘Learning vocabulary through reading,’ American Educational Research Journal 21: 767–87.
15. Kavari, K. E. (2014). Teaching vocabulary in ESP contexts through vocabulary learning strategies instruction. Asian Journal of Research in Social Sciences and Humanities, 4(2), 247–256.
16. McCarthy, M. (1990). Vocabulary. Oxford University Press.
17. Mellinkoff, D. (1963). The language of the law. Boston: Little Brown and Company.
18. Nation, I. S. P. (2001). Learning vocabulary in another language. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
19. Nation, P., & Meara, P. (2013). 3 Vocabulary. In An introduction to applied linguistics (pp. 44–62). Routledge.
20. National Reading Panel. 2000. Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction.
21. Washington, DC: National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.
22. Nekrasova‐Beker, T., Becker, A., & Sharpe, A. (2019). Identifying and teaching target vocabulary in an ESP course. TESOL Journal, 10(1), e00365.
23. Piribabadi, A., & Rahmany, R. (2014). The effect of the keyword method and word-list method instruction on ESP vocabulary learning. Journal of Language Teaching & Research, 5(5).
24. Saragi, T., I. S. P. Nation, and G. F. Meister. 1978. ‘Vocabulary learning and reading,’ System 6: 72–8.
25. Sarani, A., & Sahebi, L. F. (2012). The impact of task-based approach on vocabulary learning in ESP courses. English Language Teaching, 5(10), 118–128.
26. Supardi, S. (2016). ESP (English for specific purpose): teaching legal English using lexical approach. Proceedings of ISELT FBS Universitas Negeri Padang, 4(2), 346–354.
27. Veretina, I. (2012). Characteristics and features of legal English vocabulary. Studia Universitatis Moldaviae (Seria Ştiinţe Umanistice), 54(4), 103–107.
28. Vygotsky, L. S., & Cole, M. (1978). Mind in society: Development of higher psychological processes. Harvard university press.
29. Widdowson, H. G. (1983). Learning purpose and language use. (No Title).
30. Xhaferi, B. (2009). Teaching and learning ESP vocabulary. LFE: Revista de lenguas para fines específicos, (15), 229–255.