Ambiguity And Balance Between Language And Power

Author Bryan A. Garner, in his article “Making Peace in the Language Wars” (published in Garner’s Modern American Usage 3rd edition, Oxford University Press, 2009), seeks to negotiate a cease-fire between two fighting countries, the prescriptivists and the descriptivists, by dispelling myths about each of their camps. First and foremost, Garner outlines the war is happening between the lines of our favorite novels and poetry, and he describes what each camp stands for. Prescriptivists desire to instruct the world around them on how to use the language by enforcing, or at the very least informing the general public about the rules of grammar. They are sometimes described as conservative and are very concerned

The practice of settling human conflicts through intermediaries has had a rich history in Western and non-Western cultures and therefore a broad range of forms and functions. The conflicting parties in most of the societies and at all stages of social interaction have had access to external actors to whom they approach when they come to the conclusion that they are incapable to handle their different opinions by themselves. In this case, an ordinary response to identify contradictions in objectives and values be-tween adversaries is to enter into a process of negotiation in order to achieve an agreement on such differences, which is mutually acceptable. In consequence, negoti-ation seems to be a universal, human

Although Callinan J in the Workchoices’ Case does not give full merit to these justifications, a textual approach to the interpretation of the constitution expressed in Engineers’ Case it not without its reasons. There are numerous considerations that need to be weighed when determining the appropriate methodology for constitutional interpretation. A major determining factor is the practicability of its legal application, and its ability to appropriately and fairly resolve issues entrenched in the text of the constitution. The following arguments provide a support for textualism, and a criticism of other methodologies.

The University of Michigan Law School has a long history. It is famous for its academic rigorousness and supportive learning environment. It offers an intellectually challenging environment where I can learn closely from the remarkable scholars. With hundreds of courses offered, Michigan Law can help me to navigate where my interest truly lie. Beyond getting involved in law through classes, I can also have the great chance to discuss law with my peers through student journals. I am especially interested in Michigan Journal of International Law. As one of the premier international legal journals around the world, it provides an opportunity for me to understand how law shapes the world with a global perspective.

The nature of foreign negotiations requires caution, and their success must often depend on secrecy; and even when brought to a conclusion a full disclosure of all the measures, demands, or eventual concessions which may have been proposed or contemplated would be extremely impolitic; for this might have a pernicious influence on future negotiations, or produce immediate inconveniences, perhaps danger and mischief, in relation to other powers. The necessity of such caution and secrecy was one cogent reason for vesting the power of making treaties in the President…the boundaries fixed by the Constitution between the different departments should be preserved, a just regard to the Constitution and to the duty of my office.., forbids a compliance with your request."

The vagueness of constitution, while enabling the country to progress, has also been the source of conflict among the individuals in government office. In terms of the Supreme Court, there is a fundamental philosophical debate on how the vagueness of the constitution should be interpreted. Both sides adhere strictly to the written words of the Constitution there is no debate about that. But much of the constitutional rhetoric is open for interpretation, creating two schools of thought. The first thought, “originalism” argues that the Supreme Court should interpret the constitution solely to reflect the original views of the framers. Not only should the exact text be considered, but

Kevin McCullough’s article, “Governing Without Restrictions” (2015) argues in opposition of the “without limits” utopia of the Obama administration. McCullough supports his opinion with examples of how the Obama administration fights for policies that continually strip away dignity, while claiming their opponents are actually the morally questionable ones. He hopes to argue his opinion that restrictions on issues of sexual practice are necessary in order to share and preserve his supposed “family values”. The columnist speaks in a sarcastic and condescending tone to his liberal opponents, which supports that he is ideally speaking to people with similar conservative beliefs that wish to push their “right-wing” agenda.

When comparing apples to pears, one is not making a fair comparison, but a disproportionate comparison. Often times when international law is discussed or attempts are made to understand international law; many often attempt to compare international law with existing laws such as national law or domestic law. Making such disproportionate comparisons leads to many misconceived notions and attitudes toward international law. For an adequate comparison of international law to other laws, one should look closely at the available facts. This essay will demonstrate the vitality of international law, in a world of nations which continue to increase in interdependence.

In this B.A. dissertation, we carried out a research and a critical analysis of the challenges the translator has to face when translating initialisms, neologisms and false friends. For such end, we opted for translating an extract of an academic paper titled “The Betrayal of Human Rights and the Urgency of Universal Corporate Accountability: Reflections on a Post-Kiobel Lawscape”, which was written by Anna Grear in collaboration with Burns Weston, and which was published in the academic magazine Human Rights Law Review (Oxford University Press).

Statutory interpretation is process of interpreting statutes by the judges. The definition of statutes have had very specific words but indeed the judges would still need the statutory interpretation to help them. The reason of this, even how, the words in the statutes are specific but sometimes the words contains ambiguity and vagueness in words. On top of that, each word could give us different meaning. For example, we can find in the Oxford Dictionary where a word would contain at least one meaning. Hence, without the statutory interpretation, a lot of judges would have trouble in deciding their judgments in deciding a case. This essay will analyse the four rules, intrinsic aids and extrinsic aids and presumptions in the interpretation

In a society with totalitarian government every aspect of our lives are to be controlled by them. These words are what we call paradoxes and they are the words or slogans of the party, which is basically the totalitarian government in the novel. Contrasting words are the propaganda in which the party induces into the minds of its people and use their fear to make them do anything that they want. Its almost as if they are forcing the people to accept that 2+2=5 and while its not true, the power that the party has over the people can make them happily believe so. “Ignorance is strength” that quote helps show the party’s intention to withdraw any real information that the people have and give them new ones to believe. The less that the people

One of the most ambiguous words in the English language is the word ‘thing’ simply because it can refer to anything at all. There is nothing ‘thing’ cannot refer to, not even nothingness itself. Whilst it is traditionally associated with objects, its definition extends far beyond that. If we are to define a ‘thing’ as being the equivalent of a “noun” – that is a ‘person, place, abstract concept’ et cetera – then of course there are a multitude of ‘things’ in Murakami’s work. As a result it may be easier to break the notion of ‘thing’ down into categories: physical objects (both living and non-living), supernatural elements, textual objects (that is, techniques) and of course metaphysical concepts or greater readings of the text as a whole.

Language is the inevitable medium that people use as a means of communication. However, how that person uses the language that they have varies from person to person. Some view language as a persuasive political instrument and others view it as a means of expression and empowerment. In the essay “If Black English Isn’t a Language, Then Tell Me, What Is?” by James Baldwin, he was able to illustrate the history of the discrimination of language and how black English is not accepted as its own language. Baldwin also shows that due to the lack of acknowledgement of black English, it lacks the power it needs to empower the people who speak it. In the essay “Politics and the English Language” by George Orwell, he was able to break down language and explain how language shapes reality. Orwell expresses that he is not considering the literary use of language, but language is an instrument of expression and the promotion of cognitive deliberation and persuasion. Furthermore, both these authors agree that language is a political instrument, however, Baldwin uses this instrument to unite people and Orwell uses the instrument to persuade people.

However, if one side is far more powerful than another, they are likely to simply impose their solution on the other side, who will be forced to accept it, because they have no other choice. Using Fisher and Ury's term, they have no 'BATNA' (Best alternative to a negotiated agreement). (Gillian, (2005) Negotiation, lecture notes)

In general, Translation is “an operation on languages: a process of substituting a text in one language for a text in another”. Documentary translation is regarded as an act of communication which tackles legal translation. Legal translation is a special type of an act of communication which takes place “in the mechanism of the law”. Only professional translators specialize in legal translation because legal translation is the foundations of social relationship as marriage, contract, agreements and civil rights such as wills and inheritance. Moreover, when translating a text within the field of law, the translator should keep the following in mind. The legal system of the source text (ST) is structured in a way that suits that culture and this reflected in the legal language similarly to the target language (TT). The general characteristic features of English and Arabic legal translation are lexical, discourse-level and syntactic features.