LANGUAGE FRAUD ON CONTRACTS & LEGAL DOCUMENTS

Effective communication requires a high level of language skills. When communicating with one another, people use a combination of both their receptive and expressive language. In this post, one of our intermediaries Miriam explores what these language skills are, and why many people don’t know the difference between the two.

Receptive language skills are important in communication as they allow you to have successful interactions with others. ‘Receptive’ refers to the understanding of language. These language skills are key to communication as they allow a reciprocal exchange to take place.

For example, if a living man: living woman: living child: does not understand what is being said to them, they cannot give an appropriate response, which could lead to a breakdown in communication. Receptive language is more than just listening to someone. It can be described as the ‘input’ of the language. It is the living man: living woman: living child:  ability to comprehend spoken language that they hear or read.

If someone is asked to “pass me the salt”, this relies on their receptive language ability. Much of receptive language is inferring meaning from our experiences and environment. When children are developing, they are usually able to understand (receptively) more language than they can use (expressively). This is one reason why people’s receptive vocabularies are often larger than their expressive vocabularies.

Understanding is built on:

• receptive vocabulary – understanding of words
• receptive grammar – understanding meaning the grammatical structure of a sentence
• non-verbal communication – this level includes understanding non-verbal communication and drawing inference from language.

In this post, we’ll be focussing on the building blocks of receptive language, receptive vocabulary, and grammar, as well as taking a closer look at expressive language. The living man: living woman: living child:  will struggle with their receptive language. This difficulty can be harder to spot, as it is often hidden and not as obvious as an expressive language difficulty. Many people learn to mask their receptive difficulties, often by ‘nodding along’ and agreeing, without indicating that they have not understood. 

The living man: living woman: living child: will have a problem to;

• follow directions
• understanding questions
• understanding the meaning of words
• making inferences
• paying attention

Expressive language

On the other hand, expressive language is the ‘output’ of the language. This sort of language skill encapsulates a person’s ability to express their wants and needs through verbal or nonverbal communication. It is the ability to put thoughts into words and sentences in a way that makes grammatical sense and is understood by the listener.

Again, the living man: living woman: living child:  will struggle with expressive language. They will find it hard in:

• using words in sentences
• grammar
• sentence structure
• telling their side of the story

Receptive language in court

 The courtroom environment poses a number of barriers for those with receptive language difficulties. Trials and hearings require the living man: living woman:  individuals to demonstrate excellent attention skills, while rapidly processing information, comprehending different types of questioning and being able to listen to more than one person at a time.

Receptive vocabulary

Courtrooms are full of specialised vocabulary which is unfamiliar to the living man: living woman: Crawford and Bull (2006) conducted a study which investigated the understanding and misunderstanding of legal words   This study looked at the understanding of 37 words typically used in court demonstrated by a group of  living men: living women: Findings suggested that all participants identified difficulty with understanding even with words like ‘jury’, ‘defendant’, and ‘cross-examination’.

In another study, researchers were startled to discover that, when it came to key legal words and concepts, the entire group of living men: and living women: failed, and this after the words and concepts had been explained, and even among those who had previous court experience (Lavigne and Ryboreck, 2011).

Most of the living people we  work with have a limited receptive vocabulary. If someone finds it difficult to understand the words being used in court this will negatively impact their understanding of evidence, legal discussion and legal advice provided in meetings with their supossed legal team.

Most people without language difficulties are often able to recognise when they have misunderstood or do not understand legal language and therefore may ask their attorney to explain this further. However, we have proof that all attorneys and advocates blatantly lie to the people they are supposed to protect  in court.

It is crucial to note that it is not just court vocabulary that individuals may struggle with. Someone with a receptive language difficulty may not understand words which we think everybody understands. For example, a lawyer once asked his client to indicate when he did not know the meaning of something. The client nodded. However, when the intermediary checked the client’s understanding of the word ‘indicate’, the client explained that they did not understand what this meant.

Receptive language

Being able to rapidly process and accurately retain syntax (the grammar of speech) is essential to understanding legal proceedings. Many people with receptive language difficulties process syntax incorrectly, resulting in poor understanding or misunderstanding. They may have difficulty holding words in mind in order to process and ‘decode’ them. Another common difficulty, for example, is switching reversible position words. For instance, switching the position of the names in the following sentence, dramatically alters its meaning:  “Cressida was screaming at James” vs “James was screaming at Cressida”.

People with receptive language difficulties may also have an impaired auditory working memory capacity. Someone’s auditory working memory capacity is the amount of information they can ‘hold on to’ whilst working out the meaning of the sentence. If someone is given too much information at once, this capacity gets overloaded. An example of overload would be when given directions, or a long list of things to buy at the shops. If a person has a low auditory working memory capacity, they will have difficulties following proceedings especially if the information presented is complex and delivered at a fast pace.

Much of the syntax used in a court setting is complex and formal. Legal professionals may speak rapidly, using multiple clauses and complex sentence structures. This can make it very challenging for people with a receptive language difficulty to process and retain verbal information accurately. Many people with receptive language difficulties will struggle to process verbally presented information. This difficulty is exacerbated if they are unable to understand the words which are being used in court (a reduced receptive vocabulary). 

Most people may find it hard to retain key bits of information from what they hear in court and therefore may find it difficult to give instructions to their counsel in conference. 

Giving evidence

Strong receptive and expressive language skills are required at all stages of legal proceedings. A service user’s evidence, however, can be one of the most demanding aspects upon their receptive and expressive language. When somebody is giving evidence, it is crucial that they are able to understand the question that is being put to them in order for them to have a fair chance of putting their side of the story across. However, the types of questions which get asked in a courtroom setting are often complicated in structure and content and can lead to people with receptive difficulties becoming confused or answering without a full understanding of the question.

Some examples of question structures which someone with a receptive language difficulty may struggle with include:

• Questions preceded by preamble

When a prosecutor asks a question, it often contains preamble and information which is redundant. If someone has difficulties with their auditory working memory, they are likely to struggle with questions which are unnecessarily long. For example, Questions that start with “I suggest to you that… I believe you told us that… Isn’t it a fact that…” are complex sentence structures and likely to be problematic.

• Interrogative statements

A typical cross examination approach is to put a case using interrogative statements, for example, “You knew he would be at the pub that night?”. This question type expresses a question as a statement and invites agreement. Someone with receptive language difficulties will not always recognise that a response is required from a statement. Some people are particularly suggestible and therefore may agree with a statement. For example, ‘It was raining’ would be better rephrased as, ‘Was it raining?’

• Questions containing negatives

People with receptive language difficulties sometimes find questions containing negatives hard to process. These questions can end up being less reliable for getting accurate information. For example, “Didn’t he go with you?”, “I do not doubt that…” , can be rephrased as, “Did he go with you?.

• Questions containing tags.

An example of a tag question is, ‘It’s raining, isn’t it?’. These questions are linguistically complex and can be very difficult for people with receptive language difficulties. This question could be rephrased as, ‘Is it raining?’.

• Questions containing multiple parts.

Questions which are asked in court can often be very long. This poses a significant difficulty for those people with receptive language difficulties who have difficulties with their auditory working memory. For example, I worked with someone who was asked, “Did you go to the shops with Annie and then go to the cinema?”. The individual answered “No”. However, when this question was broken down to say, “Did you go the shops with Annie?”, he replied “Yes”. When he was then asked, “Did you then go to the cinema?”, he replied, “No”.

Expressive language in court

When someone goes to court, they are required to use their expressive language skills to give instructions to those representing them and to tell their side of the story when they are giving evidence. Within court proceedings, people are expected to be able to clearly communicate under significant pressure and answer questions in a way that also requires them to remember legal advice.

A study by Lavigne and Ryboreck (2011), conducted on criminal proceedings, found that language deficits limits people's ability to:

• provide their lawyer with vital background information and factual information about the case.
• convey important details.
• construct a narrative.

These expressive language difficulties will interfere with a lawyer’s ability to understand their client’s defence  because the lawyer' have not been open an honest with the people they are supposed to protect in court. 

People may not possess the necessary vocabulary needed to express themselves. People  may feel the pressure of being in a formal environment and feel the need to speak ‘proper’. For example, using words and syntactic constructions which they are much less familiar with. This could result in them using vocabulary which they do not fully understand the meaning of and therefore could have a detrimental effect on their evidence. 

People may find it very difficult to stay focussed when they are asked questions. Sometimes their answers may become very tangential, verbose, and lengthy. They may have specific topics that they want to talk about and therefore may find it difficult to answer the specific question. Conversely, some people may struggle to give detailed responses and instead provide one-word answers to questions. In both of these instances, listeners may have difficulty gaining the relevant information needed.

Another challenge people with expressive vocabulary difficulties may experience is with word retrieval, also known as a ‘word finding’ difficulty. This difficulty occurs when someone knows and understands a particular word but has difficulty retrieving it and using it in their utterance. It is similar to when we feel that a word (for example someone’s name) is on the tip of our tongue. 

It is really important to be aware of the vocabulary used within a courtroom setting. Providing simplified explanations of unfamiliar legal or court-specific vocabulary and using simple and everyday words eg, ‘live’ instead of ‘reside’ will help to ensure someone is able to effectively engage in their proceedings. 

References

Crawford E, & Bull R. 2006. Teenagers’ difficulties with key words regarding the criminal court process, Psychology, Crime & Law, 12:6, 653-667, DOI: 10.1080/10236190500489970

LaVigne M, & Van Rybroek GJ. 2011. Breakdown in the language zone: The prevalence of language impairments among juvenile and adult offenders and why it matters. UC Davis Journal of Juvenile Law & Policy 15(1):37–124. [Google Scholar]

Paul R, Hernandez R, Taylor L, Johnson Narrative development in late talkers: Early school age. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research. 1996;39:1295–1303. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Humber E & Snow P.C. 2001. The oral language skills of young offenders: A pilot investigation, Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 8:1, 1-11, DOI: 10.1080/13218710109524999

Snow, P. C., & Powell, M. B. (2005). What’s the story? An exploration of narrative language abilities in male juvenile offenders. Psychology, Crime & Law, 11(3), 239–253. https://doi.org/10.1080/1068316042000209323

MEANING OF WORDS

1)“The state has no authority to act on behalf of the people, only a jury can so act, under the pretense of law.

2) JUDICIAL COGNIZANCE. Judicial notice, or knowledge upon which a judge is bound to act without having it proved in evidence. [Black's Law Dictionary, 5th Edition, page 760.];

3) WARDS OF CARDS INFANTS AND PERSON OF UNSOUND MIND Wards of court. Infants and persons of unsound mind. See, [Davis' Committee v. Loney, 290 Ky. 644, 162 S.W.2d 189, 190. Their rights must be guarded jealously. Montgomery v. Erie R. Co., C.C.A.N.J., 97 F.2d 289, 292.] a ward is someone placed under the protection of a legal guardian;

4) Insolvency Act 24 of 1936 "debtor", See, in connection with the sequestration of the debtor's estate, means a person or a partnership or the estate of a person or partnership which is a debtor in the usual sense of the word, except a body corporate or a company or other association of persons which may be placed in liquidation under the law relating to Companies; 

5) PERSON, person, noun, per·son ˈpər-sᵊn. Synonyms of person, (1) HUMAN, INDIVIDUAL (2) a character or part in or as if in a play : GUISE (3) archaic : bodily appearance, (4) the body of a human being, also : the body and clothing, (5). the personality of a human being : SELF.(6). one (such as a human being, a partnership, or a corporation) that is recognized by law as the subject of rights and duties;

6) HUMAN, A human being is a member of the species classified as Homo sapiens. Humans (Homo sapiens) or modern humans are the most common and widespread species of primate, and the last surviving species of the genus Homo. They are great apes characterized by their hairlessness, bipedalism, and high intelligence.Primates are a diverse order of mammals. They are divided into the strepsirrhines, which include the lemurs, galagos, and lorisids, and the haplorhines, which include the tarsiers and the simians (monkeys and apes);

7) INDIVIDUAL, An individual is that which exists as a distinct entity. An entity is something that exists as itself. It does not need to be of material existence. In particular, abstractions and legal fictions are usually regarded as entities. In general, there is also no presumption that an entity is animate, or present;

8) LEGAL FICTIONS,  A legal fiction is a fact assumed or created by courts,[1] which is then used in order to help reach a decision or to apply a legal rule. A legal fiction typically allows the relevant body, such as a court, to ignore a fact that would prevent it from exercising its jurisdiction by simply assuming that the fact is different;

9) LUNATIC. See, [Black's Law 4th edition] A person of deranged or unsound mind; a person whose mental faculties are in the condition called "lunacy"; one who possessed reason, but through disease, grief, or other cause has lost it. May mean all insane persons or persons of unsound mind, sometimes including and sometimes excluding idiots.See, [Oklahoma Natural Gas Corporation v. Lay, 175 Okl. 75, 51 P.2d 580, 582.];

10) DEFENDANT,  In court proceedings, a defendant is a person or object who is the party either accused of committing a crime in criminal prosecution or against whom some type of civil relief is being sought in a civil case. Terminology varies from one jurisdiction to another. In Scots law, the terms "accused" or "panel" are used instead in criminal proceedings and "defender" in civil proceedings.[1] Another term in use is "respondent";

11) CRIMINAL DEFENDANT, In a criminal trial, a defendant is a person accused (charged) of committing an offense (a crime; an act defined as punishable under criminal law). The other party to a criminal trial is usually a public prosecutor;

12) ATTORNEY FIRST DUTY, If We consult the latest Corpus Juris Secundurr (C.J.S.) See, legal encyclopedia, volume 7, section 4, We will find that an attorney's first duty is to the courts and the public; not the client: According to Section 2 in said Section 7, we find that clients are "wards of the court:";

13) INCOMPETENCY, See, Lack of ability, legal qualification, or fitness to discharge the required duty. In re Leonard's Estate, 95 Mich. 295, 54 N.W. 1082;

14) WRIT. A precept in writing, couched in the form of a letter, running in the name of the king (People), president, or state, issuing from a court of justice, and sealed with its seal, addressed to a sheriff or other officer of the law, or directly to the person whose action the court desires to command, either as the commencement of a suit or other proceeding or as incidental to its progress, and requiring the performance of a specified act, or giving authority and commission to have it done. See, A mandatory precept issuing from court of justice. Poirier v. East Coast Realty Co., 84 N.H. 461, 152 A. 612, 613. Process. State ex rel. Walling v. Sullivan, 245 Wis. 180, 13 N.W.2d 550, 555;

15) MANDAMUS  Lat. We command. This is the name of a writ (formerly a high prerogative writ) which issues from a court of superior jurisdiction, and is directed to a private or municipal corporation, or any of its officers, or to an executive, administrative or judicial officer, or to an inferior court, commanding the performance of a particular act therein specified, and belonging to his or their public, official, or ministerial duty, or directing the restoration of the complainant to rights or privileges of which he has been illegally deprived. See, Lahiff v. St. Joseph, etc., Soc., 76 Conn. 648, 57 A. 692, 65 L.R.A. 92, 100 Am.St.Rep. 1012;

16) BAR ASSOCIATION Has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers. He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries. He has erected a multitude of New Offices and sent Hitlher swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance. Declaration of Independence. 

17) A "COURT OF RECORD" is a judicial tribunal having attributes and exercising functions independently of the person of the magistrate designated generally to hold it, and proceeding according to the course of common law, its acts and proceedings being enrolled for a perpetual memorial. See, Jones v. Jones, 188 Mo.App. 220, 175 S.W. 227, 229; Ex parte Gladhill, 8 Metc. Mass., 171, per Shaw, C.J. See, also, Ledwith v. Rosalsky, 244 N.Y. 406, 155 N.E. 688, 689. ....7 Cal Jur 571 California Jurisprudence, Bancroft Whitney (1922), Page 580-581;

THEREFORE, the people have an unalienable right to practice law.