I'm going to go with the "form is necessary to a point but does not trump making logical sense" camp.
Also (this is aimed at a certain type of debater see a lot) try not to be an annoying know-it-all about pronunciation. Prima Facie is technically "supposed" to be pronounced "pree-mah fah-kee-ay", but since it has been adopted as an English legal term, it has lost any standardized pronunciation. Most lawyers say "priy-muh fay-shee", but there are a lot of variants. (It's like "llama", which is technically supposed to be pronounced "yah-ma", but nobody says it like that and pointing it out is just irritating.) Feel free to say it however you think is best, but don't be a stickler about it.
Definitely; it's just one of many debate-specific, and apparently law-specific too, language conventions.
Similarly, everybody outside the debate world uses "solvency" to refer to cash flow or a chemical property, but the occasional purist in debate who insists on "effectiveness," or on one occasion I heard "curative power," is just being a pain.
Here at Northwest Christian University, we debate and speak to lift up the glorious name of God. We compete our hearts out, but we also involve ourselves in other groups and activities, because there are too many opportunities to serve and grow for any of us to put everything into one pursuit.
I'm going to go with the "form is necessary to a point but does not trump making logical sense" camp.
ReplyDeleteAlso (this is aimed at a certain type of debater see a lot) try not to be an annoying know-it-all about pronunciation. Prima Facie is technically "supposed" to be pronounced "pree-mah fah-kee-ay", but since it has been adopted as an English legal term, it has lost any standardized pronunciation. Most lawyers say "priy-muh fay-shee", but there are a lot of variants. (It's like "llama", which is technically supposed to be pronounced "yah-ma", but nobody says it like that and pointing it out is just irritating.) Feel free to say it however you think is best, but don't be a stickler about it.
Definitely; it's just one of many debate-specific, and apparently law-specific too, language conventions.
ReplyDeleteSimilarly, everybody outside the debate world uses "solvency" to refer to cash flow or a chemical property, but the occasional purist in debate who insists on "effectiveness," or on one occasion I heard "curative power," is just being a pain.