The English language facilitates astounding works of magnificence with its magnificent malleability. Taking part in with phrases and construction as one rewrites a single sentence again and again can produce true artwork.
After which there’s this appellate opinion.
Earlier this week, the Minnesota Courtroom of Appeals printed an… fascinating opinion. Or maybe it’s extra truthful to say it’s a comparatively easy opinion a some curious stylistic resolution, proving that — typically — the Oxford comma shouldn’t be your pal.
Professor Danielle Jefferis of the Nebraska School of Legislation flagged this sentence on Twitter:
Because the professor put it: “Idk I’d rewrite this sentence however that’s simply me.”
Why have two sentences when one horrifyingly awkward one will do? No less than mess around with it to get an em-dash or a semicolon in there. Are you aware how unhealthy issues need to be for me to advocate FOR a semicolon? Exterior of drafting statutes, semicolons ought to be herded right into a rocket and blasted into the solar besides I’ll permit one for this restricted goal.
Wordsmithing is tough. Nobody is proof against an ill-drafted sentence. However that is the primary sentence within the assertion of info. Decide Klaphake, who wrote this opinion, has a protracted and accolade-filled profession on the bench. So lengthy that he’s truly retired already and bought dragged again into this case like a proficient get-away driver coming again for one final rating. So minimize him just a little slack — giggle on the sentence, not the writer.
However positively giggle.
Joe Patrice is a senior editor at Above the Legislation and co-host of Considering Like A Lawyer. Be at liberty to electronic mail any suggestions, questions, or feedback. Comply with him on Twitter in case you’re keen on legislation, politics, and a wholesome dose of faculty sports activities information. Joe additionally serves as a Managing Director at RPN Govt Search.
