Legislative language in the EU: The crucible

The present article discusses three actors whose interests shape legislative language in the EU to a significant extent: the lay reader, the legislator and the linguist. As the end user of legislation, the first is concerned with inscription - a reliable, i.e., transparent, final product. The second has a strong professional interest in prescription - fixing meaning to achieve consistent application of the law. The third is and must be utterly disinterested, focusing on description - a systematic account of prevailing usage. The dynamic obtaining among these interests is illustrated through a study of ambiguity in the use of the deontic modals shall, may and must in legislation. The discussion first takes up inconsistencies of use that compromise transparency in what is assumed to be unambiguous drafting. It then goes on to sketch attempts within the legal profession to address issues of discrepant usage in the modals and outlines mediating mechanisms, all feasible in and some unique to the EU, which might contain the tensions identified. © 2002 Kluwer Law International.