Students’ Semantic and Pragmatic Challenges in Comprehending Basic Legal English Vocabulary of Law Students in University of Tjut Nyak Dhien Medan

Min Adlina; Agusman Halawa

doi:10.32734/ijlsm.v4i2.23783

Authors

Min Adlina Universitas Tjut Nyak Dhien, Medan, Indonesia.
Agusman Halawa Universitas Tjut Nyak Dhien, Medan, Indonesia.

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.32734/ijlsm.v4i2.23783

Keywords:

Legal English, Vocabulary Interpretation, Indonesian Learners

Abstract

Legal English contains expressions whose meanings often diverge from everyday usage, which makes them challenging for learners who approach the language without sufficient background in legal contexts. This qualitative study explores how Indonesian readers interpret basic legal vocabulary and identifies patterns of misunderstanding from both semantic and pragmatic perspectives. The data reveal three recurring concerns: difficulties with polysemous terms, misinterpretation of context-bound legal expressions, and uncertainty when encountering formulaic or Latin-derived phrases. These findings echo the latest discussions in legal linguistics and applied semantics (Biel, 2020; Trosborg, 2023; Williams, 2022). A notable factor contributing to these issues is the learners’ limited exposure to authentic legal texts. The article recommends strengthening context-sensitive vocabulary instruction and providing corpus-based learning resources to build more accurate semantic and pragmatic awareness.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Adlina, M., & Gapur, A. (2024). Komparasi gaya belajar emosional Bahasa Inggris SMA Edu Global Medan dan Milner College Australia. Innovative: Journal of Social Science Research, 4(6), 8543–8554. https://doi.org/10.31004/innovative.v4i6.17145

Biel, L. (2020). Terminological variation and legal meaning in multilingual contexts. Journal of Pragmatics, 170, 112–121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2020.07.012

Cutting, J. (2020). Pragmatics in specialised communication. Journal of Pragmatics, 155, 72–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2019.10.015

Fraser, B. (2020). Pragmatic markers in institutional discourse. Journal of Pragmatics, 167, 82–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2020.06.015

Gapur, A., Taulia, & Wardana, M. K. (2024). Exploring the linguistic landscape of public elementary schools in Medan: Understanding forms and functions. International Journal of Cultural and Art Studies, 8(1), 55–73. https://doi.org/10.32734/ijcas.v8i1.16989

Gozdz-Roszkowski, S., & Pontrandolfo, G. (2019). Corpus approaches to legal language: Trends and perspectives. International Journal of Legal Linguistics, 11(2), 45–67. https://doi.org/10.1515/ijll-2019-2003

Hanks, P. (2022). Meaning potential and sense disambiguation in legal terminology. Lexis: Journal of English Lexicology, 19, 1–22. https://doi.org/10.4000/lexis.7343

Kormos, J. (2020). Cognitive processing in L2 reading of specialised texts. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 42(2), 351–372. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263119000560

Moleong, L. J. (2014). Metode penelitian kualitatif (Edisi revisi). Remaja Rosdakarya.

Murphy, M. L. (2021). Lexical meaning and polysemy in specialised registers. Applied Linguistics, 42(4), 765–787. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amz066

Paquot, M., & Granger, S. (2021). Formulaic language in academic and professional discourse: Challenges for L2 learners. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 26(3), 365–389.

Sabatini, F. (2020). Archaic expressions and interpretive ambiguity in modern legal drafting. Legal Linguistics Review, 8(1), 23–40.

Trosborg, A. (2023). Pragmatic functions in contemporary legal discourse. Journal of Pragmatics, 207, 45–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2023.06.004

Williams, C. (2022). Discourse conventions and lexical specificity in Legal English. International Journal of Legal Linguistics, 14(2), 79–102. https://doi.org/10.1515/ijll-2022-2006

Zhang, Y. (2021). Interpreting modality in legislative texts: A pragmatic perspective. Pragmatics, 31(3), 385–402. https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.20063.zha.