aicolainen wrote: ↑Sun Apr 09, 2023 4:23 amIn my persistent effort in understanding the laws, which often use uncommon language that needs to be decoded to some extent, I stumbled across a government initiative that looked into the benefits of re-writing the laws into a language that was more accessible to the common man/woman. And to my surprise I found that very high ranking lawyers, judges and prosecutors argued strongly against this initiative. You would think the ultimate goal for a lawmaker, or society even, would be that everyone knew, understood and abided by the applicable laws. That would make life predictable for everyone, which was the motivation to invent laws in the first place.
One can only speculate why these people would be against such an effort. It never materialized.
That's fascinating. I once read a rhetorician's book who spoke of "officialese" as a separate dialect, whose purpose it was to confuse and to keep ignorant even the educated layman. I think the practice of using "officialese" to obfuscate must be spread across many professions.