5 ms·
When you can cite Lord Coke in your opinion, I guess it's practically mandatory to do so. > As Lord Coke put it in the 17th century, if an owner restricts the
by roywiggins 9y ago
When you can cite Lord Coke in your opinion, I guess it's practically mandatory to do so.
> As Lord Coke put it in the 17th century, if an owner restricts the resale or use of an item after selling it, that restriction “is voide, because . . . it is against Trade and Traffique, and bargaining and contracting betweene man and man.” 1 E. Coke, Institutes of the Laws of England §360, p. 223 (1628)
- theandrewbailey 9y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Coke https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Coke
- owenversteeg 9y agoSemi-off-topic: I've noticed that Coke's writings are a bit more similar to "modern English" than other things I've read written in the 1600s. This surprised me, because he was a judge and probably wrote in formal language for the time. Formal language, to me, seems perpetually set back to the way people talked about 60-100 years previously. Thus you'd expect Coke to sound like he's writing in the 1500s, but instead he sounds like an 1800s writer. Perhaps I've caught a time-traveler? If so, to Coke: I'm having some friends over for dinner tonight, and you're welcome... email's in my profile if you need directions ;)
- mayoff 9y agoI don't know anything about Coke, but my impression of SCOTUS opinions is that they often use language I wouldn't consider formal. Consider the first sentence of section II-A of this decision: > First up are the Return Program cartridges that Lexmark sold in the United States. I often find the decision to be more readable (if much longer) than the syllabus.
- dragonwriter 9y agoFormal writing probably was influenced by the move to standardization of grammar and spelling (which was, after all, elite-driven) sooner than informal writing, so that may be part of the reason for the results you describe in that particular time frame.
- mikekchar 9y agoI don't know a lot about this topic, but my understanding is that (unlike many languages), English evolved where more formal language became popular, and casual/familiar language died away. For example, "you" is the formal version of "thee" (similar to "vous" vs "tu" in French).