|
|
|
|
|
by oneeyedpigeon
496 days ago
|
|
I don't believe that's even possible — I'd love to see an example. How do you define anything 100% literally, 100% unambiguously? You'd have to include the entire language in your definition for a start, and keep that constantly updated. |
|
I lived in Lithuania for a while and at the time, there was a big national debate about how “family” should be defined in laws — what people it can and can’t include.
So yes — a lot of emphasis is put on verbose definitions in literalist legal texts. And very very verbose explanations of many edge cases, too,
I know first hand it will be very hard to read Lithuanian legal texts for someone who is not a native speaker of the language, and even for natives it’s a challenge. So you could instead google “literalist legal systems”, and I believe you’ll find at least some examples/more context in English somewhere.