有同志撰文说:比科技学术文体更为严谨精确和正式的是法律文体。法令、契约等文书需要严格规定义务、权力、行为准则的涵义和范围,必须词义准确、文意确切。丝毫不能允许因语义的模棱两可而使人误解,被人钻了法律的空子。它的全部内容必须字面化,表层化,言外之意,弦外之音,含蓄表达、引伸理解等深层意义在法律文书中是没有立足之地的。它宁可牺牲文字的流畅也要保持文意斩钉截铁的确凿性”。
这一席话,说对也对,说不对也不对一一prescriptively, 总归是对的;而descriptively,则法律语言的事实真相却又不然,否则法律就不需要解释(立法解释、司法解释和学术解释等),许多合同纠纷也不会产生了,即使法庭审理中讯问证人所使用的语言,也是不精确的、模棱两可的,请看:
Talking of obstreperous witnesses, the following story is a favourite in legal circles. It probably isn't true but il is well worth recording for all that.
"Do you know the prisoneer well?" asked the attorney.
"Never knew him ill," replied the witness.
"Did you ever see the prisoner at the bar?"
"Took many a drink with him,"was the reply.
"How long have you known this man?"
"From two feet up to five feet ten."
"Stand down !" yelled the lawyer, in disgust.
"Can't do it." said he. "I sit down or stand up."
"Officer, remove that mad!"
And he did — with trouble.
——Legal Life and Humour. 1917 or earlier. p. 262
上列引文(虚拟)中发话的是经常使用法律语言的律师,而且他又是法庭上讯问证人(而不是在,比如说,什么茶会上同朋友聊天),可那位利用法律语言模棱两可。耍糊涂的证人,却照样有空子可钻——连律师都没法治他。这就证明客观上法律语言的不精确性,模棱两可性和可钻空子性:
语词 在律师心目中的词义 在证人心目中的词义
well 熟 健康
bar法庭(法栏)酒吧
how long 时间长短 分体高矮
stand down 退下 站下
可见,至少在客观上来说,法律语言是不精确,不严谨、易滋歧义的。因此,谁的语言水平最高,谁就能最大限度地钻法律的空子。结论是什么呢?曰: 应当如何不等于实际如何。法律(学)文字应当精确而实际上颇有极不精确的。从事法律翻译者千万别让不精确的法律文字钻了空了去。
责任编辑:admin