I think your argument is inconsistent. First you talk about whole "clauses", then you get back to words and you don't seem to connect these in any way. Anyway,

I think your argument is inconsistent. First you talk about whole "clauses", then you get back to words and you don't seem to connect these in any way. Anyway, having a bunch of many very specific terms is hardly specific to lawyers, that's not the problem. The problem with legalese, as I see it, is that it lacks higher-order types and lambdas... Erm... efficient means of generalization or specialization inline, without a need for two sentences to add one minor detail and the need for a full, multi-paragraph clause when adding a somewhat "standard" - without any modifications - piece of an arrangement. Heck, even a simple inheritance would help (you get a GeneraIPClause and while writing an agreement you just write `OurIPClause is GeneralIPClause with { ...modifications... }`.