Login or register (free and only takes a few minutes) to participate in this question.
You will also have access to many other tools and opportunities designed for those who have language-related jobs (or are passionate about them). Participation is free and the site has a strict confidentiality policy.
Italian to English translations [PRO] Law/Patents - Law: Contract(s)
Italian term or phrase:sarà posto in essere
Lo sfruttamento dell'OPERA attraverso la pubblica esecuzione e la riproduzione fonomeccanica sarà posto in essere, in Italia, alle condizioni economiche praticate dalla Società Italiana Autori ed Editori (SIAE) presso la quale l'AUTORE dichiara di essere iscritto e, all'estero, alle condizioni economiche d'uso in ogni singolo Paese
Garner's Dictionary of Modern Legal Usage, which is pretty much the bible in these matters, admits that 'shall' is used with various ways, but takes the same view as I do:
"One solution to the problem that "shall" poses is to restrict it to one sense. This solution - called the "American rule" because it is an approach followed by some careful American drafters - is to use "shall" only to mean "has a duty to" [...] This solution leads to much greater consistency." (p. 940)
In other words "shall" is used with other meanings, including the simple future, but if we want to achieve consistently clear legal drafting, we would be well advised to restrict it to one sense in legal contexts. Anything that results in clear, unambiguous texts - and ambiguity is to be avoided at all costs in legal texts - gets my vote.
I have also somewhere got an article from the ITI bulletin by a lawyer making the same point, but I'm afraid you'll just have to believe me, because I don't have the time or inclination to trawl through all the back issues right now ;-)
Hi Simon, you're very categorical and clear about this (I have my own ideas, but have never considered it from an exclusively legal viewpoint), but the simple Google references you give simply seem to establish that "shall," is used in court/legal contexts and will in others. Do you have a categorical and clear reference on this. I mean something like a judge or a professor of law saying the same thing as you, or is it just your take on it? I mean everybody (in the trade that is ;-) ) knows that shall is like a present of should (will would, shall should), but I have never read any, clear and simple, modern day explanation of the useage of shall after the introduction of "going to" as a future in mainstream useage in the 20th Century, which did not exist at all in Shakespeare's day.
this seems as good a place as any to air the old shall/will debate. 'Shall' should really only be used to translate 'dovrà', since in legal texts it is used to indicate future obligation, not merely the future. If obligation is implied, then obviously 'shall' should be used in any case. If it is a simple future, then use 'will'. Many seem to think that using 'shall' instead of 'will' gives a more formal, legal flavour to the text. What they fail to realise is that it adds a further shade of meaning
Automatic update in 00:
3 mins confidence: peer agreement (net): +1
shall take place
-------------------------------------------------- Note added at 4 mins (2008-11-20 08:29:33 GMT) --------------------------------------------------
oppure "shall be conducted/carried out"
John Mifsud Malta Local time: 08:01 Specializes in field Native speaker of: English, Maltese PRO pts in category: 49