Shall We Teachs Shall: A Systematic Step-By-Step Approach

Open access


The paper discusses the status of shall in today’s legal drafting and legal translation, and by presenting typologies by a number of authors briefly addresses the variety of meanings it is used to express, in both legislation and contracts. It introduces the “shall dilemma” faced by non-native legal translators working both from and into English. The dilemma consists in the discrepancy between the promiscuous and abundant use of shall in authentic as well as translated documents, on the one hand, and the recommendations found in various drafting manuals promoting either a shall-free policy or a disciplined use of shall, on the other hand. The research part presents the results of a survey carried out among a carefully chosen sample of professional legal translators to determine what their policy is on the use of shall. The results include both quantitative findings and additional comments made by the translators, and confirms the divide between actual practice and the recommendations. In the next section of the paper, the results are applied and a series of step-by-step exercises are introduced which should raise the awareness of legal translation trainees of the ambiguity of shall and teach them to use it in a reasoned and disciplined way.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • Adams K. 2001. Legal usage in drafting corporate agreements. Westport CT: Quorum Books.

  • Adams K. 2014. ‘Banishing Shall from Business Contracts: Throwing the Baby Out with the Bathwater.’ The Australian Corporate Lawyer 24 (3): 12–13.

  • Adams K. 2017. Categories of Contract Language: Quick Reference. Retrieved from

  • Adobe. 2015. Adobe Legal Department Style Guide. Retrieved from

  • Australian Office of Parliamentary Counsel. 2005. Plain English Manual. Retrieved from

  • Banful E. 2013. Supreme Court Decision on Election Petition – A Case for Plain English Drafting. Retrieved from

  • Beeby A. 1998. ‘Direction of translation (directionality).’ in M. Baker and K. Malmkjær (eds.) Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies. London/New York NY: Routledge 63–67.

  • Butt P. and R. Castle. 2013. Modern Legal Drafting. A Guide to Using Clearer Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  • Committee Appointed to Prepare Bilingual Legislative Drafting Conventions for the Uniform Law Conference of Canada. Uniform Drafting Conventions. Retrieved from

  • Chestermann A. 1993. ‘From ‘Is’ to ‘Ought’. Laws Norms and Strategies in Translation Studies.’ Target 5 (1): 1–20.

  • Chromá M. 2016. ‘Traps of English as a Target Language in Legal Translation.’ Comparative Legilinguistics – International Journal for Legal Communication 26: 71–98.

  • Espenschied L. E. 2010. Contract Drafting. Powerful Prose in Transactional Practice. American Bar Association.

  • Eversheds. 2011. Legal Drafting in English. Retrieved from

  • European Commission Directorate-General for Translation. 2017. English Style Guide. A handbook for authors and translators in the European Commission.

  • European Communities Office for Official Publications of the European Communities. 2003. Joint Practical Guide of the European Parliament the Council and the Commission for Persons involved in the Drafting of Legislation within European Communites.

  • Felici A. 2012. ‘Shall Ambiguities in EU Legislative Texts.’ Comparative Legilinguistics – International Journal for Legal Communication 10: 51–66.

  • Foley R. 2001 ‘Going out in style? Shall in EU legal English.’ in: P. Rayson A. Wilson T. McEnery A. Hardie and S. Khoja (eds.) Proceedings of the Corpus Linguistics Conference 2011. Lancaster: University of Lancaster.

  • Gallego-Hernández D. 2017. ‘Testing a methodological framework for retrieving parallel texts in the domain of business translation.’ Perspectives 25: 1–20.

  • Garner B. A. 2012. ‘Shall we abandon shall?’ ABA Journal. Retrieved from

  • Garner B. A. 2013. Legal writing in plain English: a text with exercises. Chicago IL: The University of Chicago Press.

  • Gibová K. 2011. ‘On Modality in EU Institutional-Legal Texts’ in A. Kaèmárová (ed.) English Matters II. Prešov: Prešovská univerzita 6–12.

  • Giczela-Pastwa J. 2016. ‘Researching inverse legal translation: corpus-based study of selected Polish legal acts in English translation.’ Poster presented at EST Congress in Aarhus September 2016.

  • Kimble J. 2011. Lifting the fog of legalese: essays on plain language. Durham: Carolina Academic Press.

  • Legislative Affairs Agency. 2017. Alaska Manual of Legislative Drafting. Retrieved from

  • Lunn R. 2017. How to Translate Contracts in a Teletransporter: A systematic approach to translating contracts into English. Self-published beta version provided by the author.

  • Office of the Legislative Counsel US House of Representatives. 1995. House Legislative Counsel’s Manual on Drafting Style. Retrieved from

  • Office of the Parliamentary Counsel. 2017. Drafting Guidance. Retrieved from

  • Office of the Revisor of Statutes. 2009. Maine Legislative Drafting Manual. Retrieved from

  • Prieto Ramos F. 2011. ‘Developing Legal Translation Competence: An Integrative Process-Oriented Approach.’ Comparative Legilinguistics – International Journal for Legal Communication 5: 7–21.

  • Scott J. 2012. ‘Can Genre-Specific DIY corpora Compiled by Legal Translators Themselves Assist them in ‘Learning the Lingo’ of Legal Subgenres.’ Comparative Legilinguistics – International Journal for Legal Communication 12: 87–100.

  • Svoboda T. 2011. Prùzkum pøekladatelského trhu. Prague:Ústav translatologie. Retrieved from

  • Texas Legislative Council. 2017. Texas Legislative Council Drafting Manual. Retrieved from

  • Trosborg A. 1995. ‘Statutes and Contracts: An analysis of legal speech acts in the English language of the law’. Journal of Pragmatics 23 31–53.

  • Williams Ch. 2005. ‘Vagueness in Legal Texts: Is There a Future for Shall?’ in V. Bhatia J. Engberg M. Gotti and S. Hellet (eds.) Vagueness in Normative Texts. Bern: Peter Lang.

  • Williams Ch. 2006. ‘Fuziness in Legal English. What Shall we Do with “Shall”?’ in A. Wagner and S. Cacciguidi-Fahy (eds.) Legal Language and the Search for Clarity. Bern: Peter Lang.

  • Williams Ch. 2013. ‘Is legal English “going European”? The case of the simple present.’ Canadian Journal of Linguistics 58 (1): 105–126.

  • Wydick R. C. 2005. Plain English for lawyers. Durham NC: Carolina Academic Press.

Journal information
Impact Factor

Cite Score 2018: 0.29

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2018: 0.138
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2018: 0.358

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 124 91 6
PDF Downloads 82 53 2