Legal English - Litigation Basic Phrases 1.mp4

[2011rhythmdivine]

I'm not impressed.  Sorry!

[merico22]

well, at the very least, this is the most action your website has received. good talking with you

[merico22]

One more thing. "litigation Basics" is an oxymoron in civil law. For these videos to make any sense, though I still object to the profit motive, one must assume: (1) even if you only speak spanish, you are familiar with the American legal system, (2) if you grew up in a different legal system we understand this will make no sense; and (3) you can find translations of these terms, in the absence of context like here, in any dictionary. That is all.

[merico22]

this video is one of the most absurd i have seen. You provide a service which "teaches" legal english or spanish by simply translating a *read* manuscript???? Have you read anything on language acquisition, cultural relevance of legal terms, learning theory, or the law itself. What are the differences between common law and civil law? How do you say in Spanish, "we first need to file a motion before the judge and she will decide what we do next. This ruling, in turn, will apply . . .

[SmartTeachingOnline]

@merico22 Thank you for your comment. This video is not the course itself. We do provide a program where common law and civil law are thoroughly compared. The instructors are qualified lawyers as well as language instructors. I agree with you that a course of this nature cannot be a translation course per se. In Spanish you may say "Es necesario promover ante el juez y él decidirá lo que procede. Este auto, en turno, se aplicará...." Gracias por tu comentario.

[merico22]

Thank you for your prompt response. I saw the video to wihch you referred me. It is not different from the one above. How do you explain "due process," to an hispanohablante for whom the term "debido proceso" means very little, and it certainly does not mean what any American -- wrongly or correctly -- would identify as a violation of due process, for example. "Amparo" is no a similar legal concept to "due process." My point is that for someone trained in the common law, it is easy to think

[merico22]

My concern is the provision of a service, for profit, that is not what it purports to be. The lack of understanding is not purposeful, perhaps, but profeteering none the less. It is aimed at the vulnerable.  "Legal Spanish" is no more specialized than "Legal English" when based solely on translation. Would a lay person *know* what estoppel means even if a paragraph describing it is clear? no. Estoppel means estoppel when understood as a term of art.

[apbmusica2007]

gracias x las oraciones! y los subtitulos!

[ilovemiscosas]

this was difficult! but not impossible =)

[tonydjangolopez]

very nice... thank you!