Most of those are valid responses in textual criticism. For example, in law one could fairly comment that: 1. Literalism isn't absolute - e.g the old British

Most of those are valid responses in textual criticism. For example, in law one could fairly comment that: 1. Literalism isn't absolute - e.g the old British legal tradition of using England to refer to England & Wales 2. Laws supersede one another - new laws overriding old ones, constitutional laws taking primacy 3. Translation challenges occur - when documents like birth/death certificates, immigration papers, college transcripts, police clearances, marriage licenses, divorce decrees and etc are submitted in foreign countries for acceptance by courts and other institutions as legal record. 4. There is space for interpretation - See laws deliberately leaving room for interpretation with phrases like "reasonable force" Despite these challenges, textual critics of legal writings are often able to successfully decide whether a given statement about a text is correct/incorrect.