Лектор докладно проаналізувала разом з учасниками оволодіння фразовими дієсловами та дієсловами із залежними прийменниками в юридичній англійській мові, а саме:
1. Вступ. Роль Phrasal verbs та verbs with dependent prepositions у професійному спілкуванні правника англійською мовою.
2. Phrasal verbs: характеристика та класифікація.
3. Verbs with dependent prepositions: особливості та труднощі.
4. Обговорення Phrasal verbs та Verbs with dependent prepositions на основі практичних прикладів із юридичних текстів англійською мовою.
5. Висновки та рекомендації. Як тренувати: класифікація, картки, контекст, аналіз справ.
У рамках характеристики фразових дієслів та дієслів із залежними прийменниками в юридичній англійській мові акцентовано на наступному:
1. Introduction. The Role of Phrasal Verbs and Verbs with Dependent Prepositions in the Professional Communication of Lawyers in English
In modern legal communication, both phrasal verbs and verbs that require specific dependent prepositions play a decisive role in ensuring natural, accurate, and efficient interaction. Legal English may appear formal and rigid, yet it relies heavily on multi-word verb structures that provide nuance, linguistic flexibility, and clarity when used correctly. These units are not optional or stylistic; they are deeply embedded in everyday legal practice, shaping how lawyers draft documents, negotiate, advise clients, and interpret legal texts.
1. Naturalness and Professional Fluency
Legal professionals who work in English often interact with colleagues, clients, regulatory bodies, courts, and international partners. In these settings, the ability to use language that sounds authentic is essential. Phrasal verbs such as set out, carry out, work out, draw up, and take over appear frequently in correspondence, internal memos, mediation, corporate communication, and even courtroom advocacy.
Their correct use helps lawyers sound confident and credible, avoiding the overly literal or unnatural constructions that non-native speakers sometimes produce.
2. Precision and Clarity in Legal Tasks
Despite being idiomatic, many multi-word verbs express legal concepts with remarkable precision.
For example:
· to carry out obligations conveys performance under a contract,
· to enter into an agreement signals formation,
· to comply with regulations expresses legal conformity.
Similarly, verbs requiring fixed dependent prepositions—such as rely on, object to, consent to, apply for, base on, argue for, result in, provide for—form the backbone of legal reasoning and legislative drafting.
These combinations structure how relationships, duties, consequences, and interpretations are framed.
3. Dominance in Legal Writing and Formal Documentation
While phrasal verbs often appear in more practical and communication-focused legal contexts, verbs with dependent prepositions dominate formal legal documents:
· contracts,
· pleadings,
· statutes,
· regulations,
· policy papers,
· judgments.
These texts rely on structural consistency and established legal phrasing. For example, phrases such as “subject to,” “liable for,” “contrary to,” “in accordance with,” and “capable of” are deeply ingrained in legal drafting conventions and cannot be replaced without altering the meaning.
4. Importance in Legal Interpretation
Many legal disputes hinge on precise wording.
The meaning of a provision may depend on a specific preposition, such as “in,” “on,” “under,” “between,” or “within.”
A misused preposition can shift responsibility, alter timelines, or change the scope of a party’s rights.
Therefore, mastering dependent-preposition structures ensures accuracy not only in writing but also in interpreting the language of statutes, contracts, and court decisions.
5. Essential for Client Communication and Negotiation
In practical legal work, lawyers must communicate quickly and clearly. Multi-word verbs help achieve this conciseness.
Expressions like sort out the matter, follow up on the complaint, look into the issue, point out a discrepancy, break down the facts, or set forth the arguments enable efficient, precise dialogue.
Clients also tend to use such expressions, so lawyers must both understand and respond to them.
6. Bridging Informal and Formal Registers
Phrasal verbs provide an effective bridge between:
· formal legal English, used in written documents, and
· functional, real-life English, used in meetings, presentations, negotiations, and client counselling.
Lawyers must navigate both domains, and mastery of multi-word verbs allows them to switch registers smoothly while maintaining professionalism.
7. International Relevance
In cross-border practice—whether corporate, arbitration, human rights, immigration, or commercial law—English is the lingua franca.
Legal professionals from different jurisdictions rely on shared linguistic patterns, including phrasal verbs and dependent-preposition verbs, to ensure mutual understanding.
Thus, command of these structures enhances legal cooperation and reduces the risk of misunderstanding.
2. Phrasal Verbs: Characteristics and Classification
According to the presentation, a phrasal verb is a multiword verb consisting of a verb + a particle (adverb or preposition). Some consist of two words, others of three or more. Their meaning cannot be understood from translating each word individually. Instead, the learner must know the exact idiomatic meaning.
Classification in the presentation includes:
· Separable phrasal verbs – the object may be placed between the verb and the particle (e.g., “run up a debt” / “run a debt up”).
· Inseparable phrasal verbs – the verb and particle must stay together (e.g., “face up to”).
· Transitive phrasal verbs – require an object (e.g., “enter into a contract”).
· Intransitive phrasal verbs – require no object (e.g., “the business took off”).
A special rule is emphasized: if a phrasal verb is separable and the object is a pronoun, the pronoun must be placed between the verb and the particle.
3. Verbs with Dependent Prepositions: Features, Nature, and Difficulties (Expanded Answer)
Verbs with dependent prepositions are an essential but challenging component of Legal English. According to the presentation, a verb with a dependent preposition is a verb that must always be followed by a specific, fixed preposition, regardless of the sentence meaning. This grammatical combination is not optional and not interchangeable—choosing the wrong preposition results in incorrect or misleading legal communication. For example, the presentation highlights the difference between the incorrect depend to and the only correct form depend on.
1. Fixed Nature of Dependent Prepositions
The defining characteristic is that these prepositional partners are fixed and memorized, not derived through logic. A verb such as rely must be followed by on; apply must be followed by for or to, depending on the grammatical pattern. These structures behave as single lexical units in meaning, similar to phrasal verbs, although they are not idiomatic in the same way.
The presentation also shows that fixed combinations exist not only with verbs, but also with:
· noun + preposition
· adjective + preposition
This expands the difficulty because the learner must master an entire system of dependency, not only isolated verbs.
Examples from the presentation include multiple exercises where learners must insert the correct preposition or choose the correct verb–preposition pair, illustrating that their meaning depends heavily on this fixed structure.
2. Why They Are Challenging for Legal English Learners
a) Lack of Logical Rules
For example, the dependency in depend on does not follow from the meaning of depend nor from general grammar rules. This unpredictability makes these verbs difficult for learners, especially in legal contexts where precision is mandatory.
b) One verb may combine with different prepositions
This creates confusion and potential legal ambiguity. A single verb can have different meanings depending on the preposition attached, which is particularly problematic in legal writing where clarity determines legal effect.
c) High accuracy required in legal discourse
Because legal documents (contracts, pleadings, statutes) demand precision, even a small error in a dependent preposition can alter meaning. For example, deal with, which is highlighted in the presentation, has several legal meanings depending on context, and wording must be precise to avoid misinterpretation.
3. Dependency Structures in the Presentation
“Reflect. Match” activities showing structures such as:
· Verb + preposition
· Noun + preposition
· Adjective + preposition
These exercises demonstrate the variety of combinations a legal professional must master.
Because legal English heavily depends on conceptual relationships (e.g., liable for, subject to, entitled to, capable of), accuracy in prepositional choice affects legal meaning directly.
4. Contextual Challenges in Legal Texts
For example:
· refer to can mean “to mention”, “to hand over for consideration”, or “to relate to,” depending on the legal context.
· deal with shows four separate legal meanings: “handle,” “be involved in,” “face something,” and “decide something.”
These examples illustrate how dependent-preposition verbs operate differently across legal genres, making them difficult both for comprehension and translation.
Such verbs are pervasive in legislation and case law, making them a core skill for any lawyer working in English.
5. Implications for Legal Professionals
Because these verbs dominate formal legal texts and require strict accuracy, lawyers must:
· Memorize them as fixed combinations.
· Learn them through context, not isolated translation.
· Pay attention to subtle meaning differences in legal sources.
· Understand that incorrect prepositions can lead to misinterpretation, ambiguity, or even altered legal consequences.
Thus, mastery of verbs with dependent prepositions is not only a linguistic requirement but also a core skill for professional legal communication in English.
4. Practical Discussion: Phrasal Verbs and Dependent-Preposition Verbs in Legal Texts
Examples of phrasal verbs in practice:
· take on – to assume responsibility
· fight for – to seek or claim legal rights
· break up – to terminate a relationship
· go over – to review terms
· back down – to concede in a dispute
· work out – to negotiate or agree on terms
· carry out – to perform obligations
· track down – to locate someone
· set out – to state or explain terms
· write off – to accept that a debt will not be recovered
Examples in legal fields:
· Company law: carry on, trade under, wind up, strike off
· Banking & finance: take out, run up, fall into, default on
Translation issues illustrated with legal texts:
Phrasal verbs such as refer to, deal with, get out, get off have multiple meanings, and only context determines the correct legal translation.
The presentation demonstrates that translation is difficult because these verbs are idiomatic and often have multiple semantic meanings in law.
5. Conclusions and Recommendations: How to Train Phrasal Verbs
1. Classification
Group verbs by type (separable / inseparable / verb + prep / verb + adverb). This helps learners avoid structural errors and recognize patterns.
2. Flashcards
Use flashcards showing the phrasal verb on one side and definition + example on the other. This supports spaced repetition and memorization, including legal-specific sets (e.g., carry out, deal with, comply with).
3. Context Practice
Work with client emails, scenarios, negotiation excerpts. Learners choose or produce the correct phrasal verb based on the situation, building automaticity and real-case accuracy.
4. Case Analysis
Identify phrasal verbs in judgments or case summaries, analyze why they are used, and compare with formal equivalents (e.g., “carry out an investigation” vs. “conduct an investigation”). This strengthens both vocabulary and legal reasoning skills.