Plain English Movement And Penman’s Criticism To Strengthening The Movement

Andi Syafrani



The plain English movement has been commencing for many decades. Recently, the movement has penetrated beyond English-speaking countries. Plain English involves the use of straightforward and clear language. Additionally, it uses modern and standard English. Penman’s criticisms range from the trivial aspect to the deeply critical concerning the communication approach in legal language. She has written essays reviling plain English in some journals such as: ‘Plain English: wrong solution to an important problem’.

Keywords: Plain English, Movement, Criticism.



Gerakan Bahasa Inggris telah dimulai selama beberapa dekade. Baru-baru ini, gerakan ini telah memasuki beberapa negara pengguna bahasa Inggris. Bahasa Inggris melibatkan penggunaan bahasa yang lugas dan jelas. Selain itu, menggunakan bahasa Inggris modern dan standar. Kritik Penman dalam hal ini berkisar dari aspek sederhana hingga kritis mengenai pendekatan komunikasi dalam bahasa hukum. Dia telah menulis esai yang mengkritik penggunaan bahasa Inggris Hukum yang sederhana dalam beberapa jurnal seperti: 'Plain English: solusi salah untuk masalah penting'.

Kata kunci: Bahasa Inggris Biasa, Gerakan, Kritik.


DOI: 10.15408/sjsbs.v5i1.7907


Aitken, J.K. and Butt, P. (2004), The Elements of Drafting, (NSW: Thomson Lawbook, 10th edition)

Asprey, M.M. (1999), Plain Language for Lawyers, (NSW: the Federation Press, 2nd edition).

Benson, R.W. (1984-1985), The End of Legalese: The Game is Over’, 8 New York University Review of Law and Social Change 3.

Butts, P. (1999), Plain Language in Property Law: Uses and Abuses, 73 Australian Law Journal.

----- and Castle, R. (2001), Modern Legal Drafting A Guide To Using Clearer Language, (Victoria: Cambridge University Press).

----- (2002), The Assumptions Behind Plain Legal Language, paper presented in the Fourth Biennial Conference of PLAIN Language Association International, Canada: September, 27. Available in (27 September 2006).

Charrow, V.R., (2001), Clear and Effective Legal Writing, (New York: Aspen Publisher, INC., 3rd edition).

Cutts, M. (1994), Lucid Law, Plain Language Commission.

Eunson, B. (1996), Writing in Plain English, (Queensland: John Wiley & Sons)

Hunt, B. (2002), Plain English in Legislative Drafting: Is It Really the Answer?, 23 Statute Law Review 24.

Kelly, D. S. L.(1989), User-Friendliness in Legal Drafting: The Credit Bill, 1 Bond Law Review 143.

Kimble, J. (1992), Plain English: A Charter for Clear Writing, 9 Thomas M. Cooley Law Review 1.

----- (1994-1995), Answering the Critics of Plain language, 5 Scribes Journal Legal Writing 51.

----- (1996-1997), Writing for Dollars, Writing to Please, 6 The Subscribe Journal of Legal Writing 1.

----- (1998-2000)., The Great Myth That Plain Language Is Not Precise, 7 The Subscribe Journal of Legal Writing 109.

----- (2002), The Elements of Plain English, Michigan Bar Journal.

Law Reform Commission of Victoria (1987), Plain English and the Law, Report No. 9.

Mazur, B. (2000), Revisiting Plain Language, 47 Technical Communication, the Journal of the Society for Technical Communication 2.

Mellinkoff, D. (1963), The Language of the Law, (Boston: Little, Brown, and Company).

Mowat, C. (1999), A Plain Language Handbook for Legal Writers, (Toronto: Carswell)

Painter,M.P.J., 30 Suggestions to Improve Readability or How to Write for Judges Not Like Judges, Legal Writing 201.

Penman, R. (1992), Plain English; Wrong Solution to an Important Problem, 19 Australia Journal of Communication 3.

----- (1993), Unspeakable Acts and Other Deeds: A Critique of Plain Legal Language, 7/2 Information Design Journal 12.

Perlman, H.S. (1986), Pattern Jury Instructions: The Application of Social Science Research, Nebrasca Law Review Vol. 65.

Postmodernism, (30 September 2006)

Steinberg, E.R.(ed) (1991), Plain Language Principles and Practice, (Detroit: Wayne State University Press).

Tanner, E. (2006), Plain English and Commercial Drafting, Lecture 1, 5, 6, Victoria University.

Tanner, E. (2000), The Comprehensibility of Legal Language: Is Plain Language the Solution?, 1 Monash University Law Review 52.

Full Text: PDF

DOI: 10.15408/sjsbs.v5i1.7907


  • There are currently no refbacks.