Introduction
Over forty years ago, the Texas Law Review decided to publish a
simple, inexpensive, easy-to-use style manual for legal writers. In his
Foreword to the Second Edition, the late Charles Alan Wright described
its objectives:
The only tool of the lawyer is words. It is therefore regrettable that,
as generations of law teachers have lamented, most law students and lawyers
do not understand the basic principles of English usage. The great goal
in writing is clarity. The ability to state one's thoughts in a clear
and understandable fashion is of importance, whether the task be writing
a law review note, drafting a statute or a contract, preparing the opinion
of an appellate court, making a jury argument, or even answering an examination
question. The rules of usage developed over the centuries are intended
to produce clarity. Observance of them lends a professional polish to
the product, and this in turn inspires confidence that the writer or speaker
is equally professional and equally competent in the substance of what
he says.
The Manual on Usage & Style, or MoUS, has never pretended
to serve as an exhaustive guidebook or the final word on legal style.
That field is better left to those who can occupy it with more authority.
It has, however, always been intended to serve as a convenient and accessible
reference tool—a compact complement to heftier tomes on usage. For
decades, it has aided legal writers in answering many of the style and
usage questions that they most frequently encounter. It is with this purpose
in mind that the Texas Law Review issues this tenth edition.
This edition features several changes. First, we have added more examples
to the rules and attempted to state them more clearly and succinctly.
Second, we have reordered the chapters by the size of their subject matter,
starting with a chapter on punctuation and moving to those on words and
ultimately sentences. Third, we have redesigned the layout of the MoUS
to make it more accessible. We have changed to a decimal numbering system
and set main headings in a sans serif typeface. Fourth, we have added
"tech tips" to explain how features of word processing software
can serve or subvert proper style. Finally, to speed the reader's location
of desired usage and style rules, we have added a word index in addition
to the topic index.
We conclude as Professor Wright did:
It is a truism that rules are made to be broken. This is especially true
of rules of usage. Only rarely can it be said that a particular form is
"right" and another "wrong." The authorities teach
only that one is "desirable" and the other "undesirable."
Growth of the language comes when masters of usage, such as Churchill
or Shakespeare, recognize that in a particular situation their thought
can best be expressed by departing from conventions. The rules in this
manual, therefore, should not be regarded as a Procrustean bed. The user
of the manual who knows what he is doing and why should feel free to depart
from the rules when this produces a better result. Most of us, however,
are neither Churchill's nor Shakespeare's, and for us the safer course is
to follow the rules rather than to strike out on our own. E.B. White has
put the matter well: "No idiom is taboo, no accent forbidden; there
simply is a better chance of doing well if the writer holds a steady course,
enters the stream of English quietly, and does not thrash about."
The Tenth-Edition Editors
J. Cam Barker
Andrew J. Ericksen
Nicole Ray Pielop
David R. Upham
The Texas Law Review greatly appreciates the guidance and contribution provided by Bryan A. Garner, one of our most distinguished alumni and a nationally recognized leader on legal language. In addition, we thank Professor Wayne Schiess for his generous
assistance and advice.
|
