Memorial写作｜《简明法律英语写作（第三版）》第二部分（中）

《简明法律英语写作（第三版）》第二部分（中）

作者：Bryan A. Garner*
译者：王硕、陈心悦、许新冉**
关于引言及第一章，参见：《简洁法律英语写作（第三版）》第一章译介
关于第二章，参见：《简洁法律英语写作（第三版）》第二章译介
关于第三章，参见：《简洁法律英语写作（第三版）》第三章译介
关于第二部分（上），参见：《简洁法律英语写作（第三版）》第二部分（上）

原则二十四

原则二十四：段落要连贯。每一段都以主题句开头。
（§24. Make your paragraphs cohesive. Introduce each one with a topic sentence.）

尽管可以把主题句放到每段末尾或中间，但最好还是将其放到段首。主题句陈述最主要的观点，能够提升段落的整体性。一个新段落会将文章内容转到另一个重点，把主题句置于段首能引导读者注意新要点。在开头就清楚地对段落进行概括，能够让后面的内容更清晰，读者在时间紧迫的情况下也能迅速把握你的观点。

好作者会将段落——而非句子——看作意群单位。主题句能保证每段都有一以贯之的核心内容。它点明段落核心大意，别的句子则起到支撑作用。

虽然听上去容易，但法律作者经常在主题句上犯错。这个问题普遍出现在讨论判例时。请看下面这个段落，开头是所援引的判例，随后是晦涩的判决：

In Johnson v. Cass & Emerson, 99 A. 633 (Vt. 1917), the Vermont Supreme Court reversed the decision of a lower court that had held that the plaintiff was “doing business” in a name other than its own without making the appropriate filing. Id. In that case the plaintiff, W.L. Johnson, used stationery in his dealings with the defendant which contained the words “Johnson’s Employment Office, W.L. Johnson, Prop’r.” Id. At 634. The court observed that the stationery “on its face showed Johnson as the owner of the business ... [and that] no person could be reasonably misled by it.” Id. At 634– 35. The court further implied, however, that if the plaintiff had engaged in misleading acts in addition to the aforementioned stationery, such as the concurrent running of regular advertisements bearing only the name “Johnson’s Employment Agency,” it would have affirmed the decision of the court below. Id. At 635. Thus, in Johnson, the pivotal issue was whether the plaintiff was “doing business” under an unregistered assumed name during his relationship with the defendant, rather than if he had actually held himself out as someone else to the defendant.

由于缺少一个好的主题句且时间顺序安排不合理（参见原则3），这段话很难理解。这两个问题都很容易修改，而判例的援引出处最好放在脚注里（参见原则28）：

The Supreme Court of Vermont has held that the pivotal issue is whether a plaintiff “does business” under an unregistered assumed name while dealing with someone the plaintiff later tries to sue. In Johnson v. Cass & Emerson, 14 W.L. Johnson, the plaintiff, transacted business with the defendant on stationery with the printed words “Johnson’s Employment Office, W.L.Johnson, Prop’r.” According to the court, the stationery showed that Johnson “was the owner of the business and was doing business under his own name,” concluding that “no person could be reasonably misled by it.” Apart from the stationery, there were no acts suggesting that “Johnson’s Employment Agency” was a registered name. If there had been, the court implied, the result might have been different. But the court held that Johnson could sue in a Vermont court because he did not do business there under an unregistered name.

请注意，在修改稿中，判例名称到第二句才出现。把判例名称置后在引文的脚注里，能让你将有力的主题句放在段首。（参见原则28）

不管你是讨论案例，还是别的什么，在修改时请密切关注你的主题句。读者应该能够通过主题句就了解文章大意。

练习

基础练习

在不改动原文的基础上，在下列段首添加一个主题句。
Over the past 100 years, legal publishers developed an intricate set of printed materials that controlled the flow of legal information. Most of this apparatus was built around cases. Elaborate systems of reporting, digesting, tracing, and evaluating cases developed. Until very recently, mastering these systems was the essence of learning legal research. The lawyer graduating from law school in 1975 had to know much more than someone who graduated in 1875, because the use of traditional paper-based, casecentered tools had grown more complex. But it was still a system built on the old paradigm of the paper- information world. This old- style research is the only kind of research that some senior lawyers, judges, and law professors accept as legitimate. That will change in the course of the next generation, but it hasn’t yet changed completely. Meanwhile, the new world of legal research is rooted in electronic information. In the past 30 years, the variety of electronic databases has grown, and the information that they store, as well as the search methods for using them, have improved enormously. Even the internet carries a wide range of legal information. The modern researcher must know how to retrieve these modern tools.

中级练习

从一篇发表了的法律文章中摘出四段，每段都要有很好的主题句。将主题句画出来。如果你加入了一个写作组或写作班，为每个同学准备一份。准备好和他们讨论这些主题句好在哪里。

高级练习

从一篇发表了的法律文章中摘出四段，每段都没有很好的主题句。修改这些段落。如果你加入了一个写作组或写作班，请为每位同学准备一份原稿和修改稿。

原则二十四的小结

将段落视为向读者传达信息的主要工具；

每一段围绕主题的一个方面展开；

为了更加清晰，把主题句放在段首；

撰写能让读者大致了解整个故事主题句；

在主题句中把案例的主要观点表达出来，而不要对案例点名道姓，用其作为支撑；

确保段落中的所有句子提供的信息都与主题相关，没有任何无关的句子。

原则二十五

原则二十五：清晰地串联起你的段落。
(§ 25. Link your paragraphs explicitly.)

尽管主题句在揭示段落主题方面很有意义，但它更重要的作用是提供过渡。也就是说，每个段落的开头都应该包含一个过渡或桥接的词或短语，以便于读者从一个段落顺利过渡到下一个段落。应该让读者迅速明白新段落是对前一段的扩展、对比，还是起其他作用。把你的段落想象成一系列的火车车厢，每个车厢都与下个车厢相连。连接处是锁定的。

几乎可以肯定，一个好的段落开头通常使用下列一种或几种方法来与前个段落建立联系：

指示词：像this, that, these, those和the这样的词；
回链（Echo links）：概述先前提及过之想法的词或短语；
明确的连接词：主要用以提供过渡的词（如also, further, therefore和yet）。

优秀的写作者会使用这三种技巧在段落间建立连续性（参见后文用例）。我们来仔细审视每个技巧，看它们在上下文中是如何协同工作的。

指示词，尤其像this和that，直接指代已经提到的事物。它们指向一个先行词。如果你首先谈论位于2911 Maple Avenue的土地，然后提到“那个财产”，“那个”就指向之前的引用。它建立了一个明确的联系。

指示词通常和回链一起使用。实际上，“财产”一词就是2911 Maple Avenue的回链。这个词与众不同，因为它在前文的引用中产生了回响。想象一下，你的朋友说，法院判决的监禁期限不够长，从而加剧了社会问题，导致暴力水平的上升。

你回应说：“这个论点是错误的，有三点理由可以反驳。”短语“这个论点”是一个指示性词语加上一个回链。你已经开了个好头：现在需要提供你巧妙引入的三个理由。

最后，还有明确的连接词。没有它们，你就不能写得更好。尽管有些人对明确的连接词抱有偏见——它们确实会被过度使用——但专业作家认为它们不可或缺。它们通常能澄清两个思想之间的关系。以下是一些最佳连接词，你可以复制下来贴在卡片上，放在你电脑旁或法律便签上。除了提醒你要过渡之外，还将为你提供丰富的选择。

当转折时：but, yet, instead, however, by contrast, on the other hand, still, nevertheless, nonetheless, conversely , on the contrary, whereas, in contrast to, unfortunately, unlike
当引入新论点时： and, also, in addition, besides, what is more, similarly, nor, along with, likewise, too, moreover, further, another, as well as
当举个例子时：for instance, for example, as one example, to cite but one example, for one thing, for another thing, likewise, another, suppose, say, imagine, consider, take
当对比时：similarly, likewise, in the same way
当重述时：in other words, that is, this means, in simpler terms, in short, put differently, again, in sum
当介绍原因时：because, since, when
当介绍结果时：so, as a result, thus, therefore, accordingly, then, hence
当让步或加以限定时：granted, of course, to be sure, admittedly, though, even though, even if, only if, true, while, naturally, in some cases, occasionally, if, while it might be argued that, despite, even assuming
当强调某个论点时：in fact, as a matter of fact, indeed, of course, without exception, still, even so, anyway, the fact remains, assuredly, all the more reason
当叙述时：that is, then, earlier, previously, meanwhile, simultaneously, now, immediately, at once, until now, soon, no sooner, that being so, afterward, later, eventually, in the future, at last, finally, in the end
当总结时：to summarize, to sum up, to conclude, in conclusion, in short, in brief, so, and so, consequently, therefore, all in all
当列出要点时：First, ... Second, ... Third, ... Finally, ...

上图这些杰出作家的文章用了全面的连接技巧。花点时间仔细研究他们的散文。注意他们如何巧妙地从一个段落过渡到下一个段落。无论主题是什么，老道的写手都能平滑地连接思想，让读者的阅读工作显得轻而易举。

尝试这个练习：拿出你写的某篇文章，看看段落分隔，看看你能否找到连接词。把它们圈出来。如果你发现自己在至少三分之一的段落中都有效地使用了连接词，那么你可能已经（也许是潜意识地）在运用这一技巧。发挥这一优势——也就是说，每次开始一个新段落时，都要开始搭建桥梁。

但如果你发现自己很少使用连接词，那可能意味着你的文本中存在一些不连贯之处。你并没有以一个连贯的思路进行写作——没有清晰的线索。这一技巧应该能改善你写作的结构，即使在段落内部，句子也必须逐条推进。然而，检验有效连接的最佳方式是段落开头。

练习

基础练习

下文是劳伦斯·弗里德曼的《美国历史中的犯罪与惩罚》（Crime and Punishment in American History，1993年）中连续段落的开头句。请识别每个段落开头中的连接词，以及连接方法（指示词、回链、明确的连接词），从第二个段落开始。请记住，这些段落开头后面会有几句话。您不是在链接列出的句子，而是在寻找每个段落开头中与前一段结尾内容显式相关的词。
1. The automobile made its first appearance on the streets, for all practical purposes, in the first decade of this century.
2. By 1940, the United States had become an automobile society.
3. The numbers have continued to rise, as automobiles choke the roads and highways, and millions of people, living in the land of suburban sprawl, use the automobile as their lifeline— connecting them to work, shopping, and the outside world in general.
4. Thus, a person who parks overtime and gets a “ticket” will get an order to appear in court and face the music.
5. In many localities, traffic matters got handled by municipal courts, police courts, justices of the peace, and sometimes specialized departments of a municipal court.
6. The traffic court judge, as one would expect, did not have the prestige and dignity of a higher-grade judge.
7. The root of this evil was, perhaps, the fact that defendants did notand do not— see themselves as criminals, but rather as unlucky people who got caught breaking a rule that everybody breaks once in a while.
8. This attitude came to the surface in a 1958 American Bar Association report on traffic matters in Oklahoma.

中级练习

在已发表的法律写作中，找到一段示例性文字（大约四页），展示良好的衔接。在每段的开头，将衔接词或词组框起来。如果你是写作小组或班级的一部分，将带有完整引用的副本分发给每位同事，并准备讨论你的发现。

高级练习

在已发表的法律写作中，找到一段文字（大约四页），展示缺乏衔接的情况。要么在需要的地方添加衔接，要么在边缘解释为什么这个问题无法通过编辑来解决。如果你是写作小组或班级的一部分，将带有完整引用的副本分发给每位同事，并准备讨论你的发现。

原则二十五的小结

在你的主题句中增加一个过渡词或短语，告诉读者该段与前一段落的关系；

明确你是在扩展一个想法、提供对比，还是以其他方式延续前文；

使用下面一到多种技巧：指示词、回链和明显的连接词；

让你的过渡平稳而不唐突；

偶尔看看转化想法的列表；

注意你文章中的不连贯或“颠簸”之处：它们表明清晰度在下降；

原则二十六

原则二十六：调整段落的长度，但通常保持简短。
(§26. Vary the length of your paragraphs, but keep them generally short.)

记住，段落是思维的基本单位。你有没有统计过你段落的字数？如果没有，你可能会发现这么做很有启发性。努力使段落的平均字数不超过150个字——最好更少——大概在三到八个句子之间。强制规定句子的数量看起来也不错。但问题在于，如果平均下来每个句子都有80个单词，那么六个句子组成的段落仍然很糟糕。因此，字数比句子数更可靠。

与句子长度（见原则6）一样，你需要在段落长度上保持多样性：有些段落较短，有些则相对较长。但要注意段落长度的平均值。并且记住，偶尔出现一个句子的段落并没什么不妥。与此相反的迷信则是语法课程残余的零散记忆。

在20世纪，段落的长度趋向于变短。尽管找到真正具有代表性的样本是一件棘手的事情，但下文表格中的数据——显示了20、21世纪著名法律作家的作品中每段的平均字数——说明了这一趋势。

截屏2024-12-07 19.02.39.png

可怜的Thayer, Foote和Hughes的读者们！

来自赖特教授著名的《联邦诉讼与程序》（Federal Practice and Procedure）一书的抽样展示了各种段落长度，极具趣味和吸引力。其中最长的段落有231个字，但是最短的段落只有14个字。

尽管有如此强有力的证据，许多当代的法律作品中仍然有大量长段落。平均段落字数在250词及以上并不少见，尤其是在法律评论中。然而，法院文件中也存在这一现象，这引发了一个特殊问题。如果你按照法院规则设置双倍行距，那么一个250字的段落将占据页面的85-90%。最终就是约一页一段。这使得文本呈现出块状，显得不够吸引人。光是看到这一点就足以让许多当代的读者感到厌烦。

但如果你的平均字数低于150个，或更好的是低于100个，读者就能有更多喘气的时间。多数页面上会是两个或更多段落。有了一些视觉变化，页面会呈现出更轻松的感觉——无论是双倍还是单倍行距。

练习

基础练习

在已发表的法律写作中，找到一个三到四页的段落长度变化适当的例子。指出你喜欢这个段落的某个具体方面。如果你属于一个写作小组或班级，给每位同事发一份副本，并准备讨论你的例子。

中级练习

将下列各段逐一分解，使其包含三到五个分段。找出新段落的最佳开头位置。

When the courts of equity created the equity of redemption, they ignored the parties’ explicit intention. They allowed the mortgagor to regain the property by performing the secured obligation after the le-gal title to the property had vested absolutely in the mortgagee. This vesting took place according to both the parties’ express language in the mortgage deed and the effect that the law courts gave the language. After their original intervention, equity courts developed the doctrine prohibiting the clogging of the mortgagor’s equity of redemption. Un-der this doctrine, even though the mortgage is in default, no agreement contained in the mortgage can cut off a recalcitrant mortgagor’s equity of redemption without the resort to foreclosure by the mortgagee. Courts won’t enforce a mortgagee’s attempts to have the mortgagor waive the right to be foreclosed in the event of a default. The prohi-bition against clogging has been characterized by a variety of labels. The most common characterization associated with the doctrine in the United States is “once a mortgage, always a mortgage.” This is only another way of saying that a mortgage can’t be made irredeemable. The clogging doctrine, as a corollary of the equity of redemption, prevented evasion by ingenious and determined mortgagees. These mortgagees had tried using many types of clauses that, while recognizing the ex-istence of the equity of redemption, nullified or restricted its practical operation.
Before an intelligent study of criminal law can be undertaken, it is necessary to focus on the single characteristic that differentiates it from civil law. This characteristic is punishment. Generally, in a civil suit, the basic questions are (1) how much, if at all, defendant has injured plaintiff, and (2) what remedy or remedies, if any, are appropriate to compensate plaintiff for his loss. In a criminal case, on the other hand, the questions are (1) to what extent, if at all, defendant has in-jured society, and (2) what sentence, if any, is necessary to punish defendant for his transgressions. Since the criminal law seeks to pun-ish rather than to compensate, there should be something about each course of conduct defined as criminal that renders mere compensa-tion to the victim inadequate. This follows from the truism that no human being should be made to suffer if such suffering cannot be jus-tified by a concomitant gain to society. No rational assessment of the kinds of activity that should be punished can be undertaken without some analysis of the purposes of punishment. Those purposes most frequently mentioned are reformation, restraint, retribution, and deterrence.
Declaratory remedies furnish an authoritative and reliable statement of the parties’ rights. Other remedies may be added if necessary, but the declaratory remedy itself makes no award of damages, restitution, or injunction. The chief problem in obtaining declaratory relief lies in the rules of justiciability— rules that courts will not issue advisory opinions, decide moot cases or those that are not ripe, or deal in any dispute that does not count as a case or controversy. Although people might settle legal arguments between themselves by going to the law library or calling the librarian, they cannot call on the courts this way. These concerns grow out of procedural and process values. They in-volve what we think about the nature of courts and judicial work. Before declaratory-judgment statutes were enacted, plaintiffs obtained relief that was sometimes essentially declaratory by suing for injunctive relief, or to quiet title to land, or to rescind a contract. When the declaratory judgment performs an analogous function, the case is justiciable and such relief is appropriate. Yet it is not possible to describe adequately all the instances in which these concerns will prevent declaratory relief. This type of relief is often useful in contract disputes. A good example is the dispute over liability- insurance coverage. The insured tortfeasor, the insurer, and the injured victim all need to know whether insurance covers the claim. When the insurer insists that it does not cover the claim and the others insist that it does, declaratory judgment is a good resolution.

高级练习

在已发表的法律写作中，找出一个过长的段落示例。标记出自然的段落分隔点。如果你属于一个写作小组或班级，将带有段落标记的副本分发给每位同事。

原则二十六的小结

撰写不同长度的段落，以增强趣味性和可读性；

避免大段充满页面的文字，这会让读者失去兴趣。无论是双倍还是单倍行距，力争每页有两个或更多的段落；

争取每段平均150个单词，每段3到8个句子；

不要拒绝偶尔出现的一句话段落。

原则二十七

原则二十七：在行文中为读者提供“路标”。
(§27. Provide textual signposts along the way.)

标题（参见原则4）无疑是文章的“路标”，但除了那些最简单的文章，你还得在行文中为读者提供指示性的文字提示。如果接下来你要讨论三个问题，就要在头一页明确指出。如果你的主张有四个好处，也请在一开始就把它们点出来。别只是模糊地说有“几个”好处，具体点。更精确的措辞能表明你对问题的成熟思考。

请看下面这段话：Although stock-appreciation rights, including alternative settlements, can solve substantial problems encountered by corporate officers in realizing the value of their stock options, this solution also imposes costs on the corporation. Most obviously, alternative settlements result in a cash outflow from the corporation rather than the cash inflow that results from the exercise of an option. Alternative settlements also result in charges to corporate earnings— charges not required for ordinary stock options. All that is required for ordinary stock options is a disclosure of the options and balance- sheet charges against retained earnings when they are exercised.

上面这段文字很难让人理出头绪。但添加指示性文字后，文章立即清晰了很多（文中的加粗仅为了突出指示性文字）：Although stock-appreciation rights, including alternative settlements, can solve substantial problems encountered by corporate officers in realizing the value of their stock options, this solution also imposes costs on the corporation in two ways. First, alternative settlements result in a cash outflow from the corporation rather than the cash inflow that results from the exercise of an option. Second, alternative settlements result in charges to corporate earnings— charges not required for ordinary stock options. All that is required for ordinary stock options is a disclosure of the options and balance- sheet charges against retained earnings when they are exercised.

添加五个词就能让语段大不相同。因为同时还删除了三个单词，所以这次修改只增加了两个词。

再举一个例子。很多读者都不习惯在一页文章的末尾读到这样的内容：The examiner’s reasoning was flawed（审查员的推理存在错误），后面紧接着一大段以“In the first place...”（首先……）开头的文字。对此，有两种修改方式，其中比较好的方案是写成这样：The examiner’s reasoning was flawed for three reasons（审查员的推理有误，原因有三）。然后在展开论述前用点式编号（参见原则43）将这些原因罗列出来。第二种修改方式是省略对三个原因的罗列，直接进入论述。但仅仅模糊地用“几个原因”指代并不能使文章完全清晰。这种措辞往往会引发读者的困惑，我们会忍不住想到底有几个理由？

恰当的指示性文字在双倍行距的文段中显得格外重要。双倍行距会将句子的间距拉长，读者的翻页次数也会增加。所以，由于大量法律文本都采用双倍行距（如辩护要点），采用指示性文字尤为重要。

练习

基础练习

找一篇已经发表的、恰当使用指示性文字的法律文章，比如一本书的节选章节，司法意见书或者法律评论文章。选择其中充分阐释指示性文字作用的部分复印下来，并把指示性文字高亮标注出来。如果你加入了一个写作班或写作组，请为每个同学准备一份做了标记的文本。

中级练习

找一篇已经发表的、没有恰当使用指示性文字的法律文章，比如一本书的节选章节，司法意见书或者法律评论文章。选择其中缺乏指示性文字的部分复印下来，然后在需要添加的地方标注出来。如果你加入了一个写作班或写作组，请为每个同学准备一份做了标记的文本。

高级练习

你的一个同事马上要请两周假，她希望你能帮忙修改一份很紧急的备忘录。她留给你了以下内容。尽管你对内容主题一无所知，也不认识备忘录的接收者Ezra Bander，但是请尽你所能修改这份备忘录，将你同事想要表达的要点更清晰地写出来。

To: Ezra Bander
From: [你同事的名字]
Subject: 集体年金
Policies Date: March 15, 2011

Attached are two photocopies of the policy files for five of the six group annuity contracts the NY examiners selected for further review. To be as responsive as possible to the examiners’ request, we have attached the applicable Administration section’s complete file to each client relating to the contracts in question (other than FSR (GA- 8192)). For FSR we have attached the Contract section’s correspondence file since it is the most complete source of client information. Please note that for the GIC files (on page 1 of the list attached to your request), we consider certain pricing information to be proprietary and confidential. Therefore, we have added a Request for Confidential Treatment to the applicable portions of these files. We discovered that the jurisdiction for one of the contracts the examiners selected (GA- 8180 Purgon) is actually Massachusetts. Please let us know if there is another contract you want to review. Due to the complexity of the SBCD Communications file, we created a timeline to facilitate the examiners’ review (which was created solely to help the examiners follow the file). We are unable to send the original policy files since we have ongoing relationships with these clients. However, we have certified to NY (see attachment) that we have copied the files they requested. Also, attached to each of the five files are all related state filing materials, including any prefilings under Circular Letter 64- 1, the submission packages to the Dept. of forms, any correspondence with the Dept., and approvals from the Dept. if received. The files have been reviewed by the business area and appropriate legal counsel.
If you have any questions, please call me.

原则二十七的小结

在日常阅读中，要留意优秀作家如何巧妙地在文章中设置文字性表示；

你必须通过使用指示性文字保证读者在你的分析或论证过程中始终跟随你的思路；

在首页点出要讨论的问题，将文章整体方向指出来；

使用命题式标题：只用完整的句子；

尽量使用点式编号罗列要点，既能便利读者也能便利你自己；

把要点、好处、原因等的数量明确也出来。别使用模糊的表达，如“几个”（several）或“一些”（a few）。

未完待续，更多文章参见：

关于第二部分（下），参见：《简洁法律英语写作（第三版）》第二部分（下）
关于英文标点，参见：《英文标点符号用法重述》