Legal English, being among the most complex and multifaceted areas of English for Specific Purposes (ESP), has duly received considerable attention on the part of linguists, discourse and learner needs′ analysts, sociolinguists and ESP researchers (Cheng and Cheng, 2014; Hafner, 2013; Hartig and Lu, 2014; Huhta et al, 2013; Shuy 2001). Most research has been carried out to investigate lexical, syntactic, grammatical and other communicative competences of law students in various cycles of higher education. An area that is still highly in need of examination is the development of communicative competences of Legal English among law practitioners who might have had a course of Legal English in their law studies and face with an urge of revision or might have not been introduced to Legal English whatsoever. In light of these observations, the present study examines the needs and problems regarding the use of general and legal English faced by 34 law practitioners, namely lawyers and judges working at two law companies and a district court in Kaunas, Lithuania. The study assumes qualitative methodology including a semi-structured interview and a questionnaire. The results have revealed that communicative competence of legal practitioners gained during their formal education does not meet the demands of their legal practice. While skills of general English appear not to cause many problems, skills of legal English are not developed to an adequate level. Therefore, as the study shows, it is absolutely inevitable to develop and offer in-service education of Legal English carefully attuned to the diverse levels of competences and needs of legal practitioners.
Cheng, W., Cheng, L. 2014. Epistemic modality in court judgments: A corpusdriven comparison of civil cases in Hong Kong and Scotland. English for Specific Purposes, 33, 15-26.
Chovancova, B. 2013. Legal Minds Think Alike: Legal English Syllabus Design and the Perceived Language Needs of Present and Former Students of Law. ACC Journal, Technical University in Liberec, 2013, Vol. 19, No. 3: 54-60.
Communication From The Commission To The European Parliament, The Council, The European Economic And Social Committee And The Committee Of The Regions. 2015. European Commission. http://ec.europa.eu/education/documents/et-2020-draft-joint-report-408-2015en.pdf
Galbraith, M. W. 2004. Adult Learning Methods: A Guide for Effective Instruction. Malabar: Krieger Publishing Company.
Hafner, C. A. 2013. The discursive construction of professional expertise: Appeals to authority in barrister’s opinions. English for Specific Purposes, 32(3): 131-143.
Hartig, A. J., Lu, X. 2014. Plain English and legal writing: Comparing expert and novice writers, English for Specific Purposes, 33, 87-96.
Huhta, M., Vogt, K., Johnson, E., Tulkki, E. 2013. Needs Analysis for Language Course Design: A Holistic Approach to ESP. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Jarvis, P. 2012. Adult learning in the social context. New York: Routledge.
Knowles, M. S., Holton, E. F., Swanson, R. A. 2015. The Adult Learner: The Definitive Classic in Adult Education and Human Resource Development. New York: Routledge.
Litosseliti, L., (ed.) 2010. Research Methods in Linguistics. London: Continuum International Publishing Group.
Smith, M. K. 2002. Malcolm Knowles, informal adult education, self-direction and andragogy, the encyclopedia of informal education. www.infed.org/thinkers/et-knowl.htm
Shuy, R. W. 2001. Discourse Analysis in the Legal Context. In The Handbook of Discourse Analysis, ed. Schiffrin, D., Tannen, D., and Hamilton, D.E. Malden: Blackwell Publishing Ltd., 437-452.
Tough, A. 1979. The Adult’s Learning Projects, 2nd ed. Toronto: Ontario Institute of Studies in Education.