|
Authored by: belboz on Wednesday, September 05 2012 @ 08:56 AM EDT |
I agree. No normal jury member could have understood this
when the judge read it to them, and much less understood it.
Their minds would be paralyzed by a mixture of boredom and
the strain of trying to understand.
Reading it afterwards would help little. Each passage would
have to be read repeatably for understanding.
Either text should be clearer, or a translator should have
sat down with jury, after the judges reading, and explain
what this meant in a language they could relate to. And
plenty of sports or car analogies would be needed :)
Alas, this kind of writing is the result of (any)
professionals
wanting to be as precise as possible (in their field of
expertise)to avoid
misunderstanding . And they fail just because of that; their
audience is not their peers.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|