This discussion is closed.
Russell
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#41
Report 14 years ago
#41
Profesh you seem to be following the line that all law students take when they have just started or are about to start doing law. You are constantly using unecessary words like perusal and notwithstanding. Realise this - just because they are used in law sometimes doesn't mean that is how all lawyers write. It makes you sound really ameteurish. Also your statement has too much glorified and nonsensical rhetoric. You start off with this pointless overview of current legal affairs, making mistakes along the way, then continue to talk about, no tell the person reading it (who is probably so qualified and unknowledgeable it's untrue), marital union and other such randomnly picked topics (or so it blatantly seems).

Don't let the starry lights of law blind you. Talking the talk is one thing but walking it another
0
Profesh
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#42
Report Thread starter 14 years ago
#42
(Original post by Russell)
Profesh you seem to be following the line that all law students take when they have just started or are about to start doing law. You are constantly using unecessary words like perusal and notwithstanding.
Compare and contrast:

"I have readied this text for your reading."
"I have readied this text for your perusal."

"Notwithstanding this fact."
"Not having failed to take into account this fact."

Need I say more? Such is succinctitude; such is the fallacy of your ill-founded critique.

Realise this - just because they are used in law sometimes doesn't mean that is how all lawyers write. It makes you sound really ameteurish[sic].
Indeed. Heaven forbid that I should sound 'ameteurish'; what with my recently-acquired training contract at Clifford Chance, and all.

Also your statement has too much glorified and nonsensical rhetoric.
For lack of space in which to disseminate a treatise as to the particular legal (and concomitant humanitarian) ramifications of emergent "anti-terrorist" policies worldwide, I may only purport a certain conceptual awareness. This is a personal statement, not an essay, for Christ's sake.

You start off with this pointless overview of current legal affairs, making mistakes along the way, then continue to talk about, no tell the person reading it (who is probably so qualified and unknowledgeable it's untrue), marital union and other such randomnly picked topics (or so it blatantly seems).
Ahem. First off: merely because a given admissions tutor knows 'x', it would be nonetheless quite the miracle of induction for them to therefore assume that I know 'x'. Were such a blinkered philosophy adopted across the board, I should surmise that, if nothing else, exams would become significantly more straightforward: don't be so facile.

Furthermore, precisely what is it that you are attempting to argue here? Might I observe the hypocrisy manifest in your flagrantly amibiguous and rhetorical "critiques" of my style; which are themselves, for lack of a better word, subsumed in baseless rhetoric? Is the 'person reading it', as you state, 'qualified' or 'unknowledgeable'; and, presuming the latter, would they not therefore find my erring on the didactic side to be more elucidating than egregious? 'Nonsensical rhetoric', indeed!

Finally, as to my alleged 'mistakes' (which you have stipulated exist, and yet oh-so constructively neglected to clarify where): these are comprised of a personal statement which has thus far secured me entry to five out of six institutions. Make of that what you will.

Don't let the starry lights of law blind you. Talking the talk is one thing but walking it another
Quite; rather, I 'talk it' now, in order that I may 'walk it', in Bristol, pending the advent of October 2005.
0
Rainy
Badges: 14
#43
Report 14 years ago
#43
Give the guy a medal! If not, an earlship and a grand pile in Cornwall (I hear the Duchy may be going).
0
Beekeeper
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#44
Report 14 years ago
#44
(Original post by Raindance)
Give the guy a medal! If not, an earlship and a grand pile in Cornwall (I hear the Duchy may be going).
Quite right. Give the guy some credit, he did open the thread with:
Feedback is unnecessary; this is purely for the benefit of prospective applicants. I sincerely hope that it serves you as well as it has me
*sigh* Jealousy.
Besides, the personal statement is spot-on, and it's more than what you would expect from the average barrister.
As for the 'you've got to walk the walk' comment, i'd say if you've got a flare with words like this guy then you've made it anyway.
0
Manatee
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#45
Report 14 years ago
#45
Profesh,

A word of advice: you seem to be labouring under the mistaken belief (you may prefer "misapprehension") that this is how real lawyers speak. They do not. And as a City-trained solicitor myself, I do know what I'm talking about.

A hundred years ago, perhaps, but not today. You may be familiar with Lord Woolf's reforms - one of his main aims was to simplify legal language and do away with unnecessary and outdated legal jargon. If you're going to be a successful lawyer, you need to know your law; simply sounding as if you've swallowed a dictionary isn't going to get you anywhere, except perhaps laughed at by clients and colleagues.

Oh, and if you're going to use "big" words, at least use them correctly. "Purport" should be followed by a verb, not a noun (so your sentence above, "I may only purport a certain conceptual awareness", makes no grammatical sense). In a similar vein, there is no such word as succinctitude; I think you meant succinctness. Going back to your personal statement, legal practise should correctly be legal practice (practise is a verb, practice a noun). I may be nitpicking, but you're the one who asked for examples of your misuse of the English language.

Just one last thing - I do not for a moment believe that Clifford Chance have offered you a training contract. The recruitment of trainee solicitors is regulated by the Law Society and its rules state quite clearly that "offers of employment as a trainee solicitor must not be made before 1 September in the student's final year of undergraduate study" (see here). So next time you try to impress with fictitious achievements, I suggest you do your homework first.
0
Profesh
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#46
Report Thread starter 14 years ago
#46
(Original post by Manatee)
Profesh,

A word of advice: you seem to be labouring under the mistaken belief (you may prefer "misapprehension") that this is how real lawyers speak. They do not. And as a City-trained solicitor myself, I do know what I'm talking about.

A hundred years ago, perhaps, but not today. You may be familiar with Lord Woolf's reforms - one of his main aims was to simplify legal language and do away with unnecessary and outdated legal jargon. If you're going to be a successful lawyer, you need to know your law; simply sounding as if you've swallowed a dictionary isn't going to get you anywhere, except perhaps laughed at by clients and colleagues.
Ah, yes: the 'Plain English Campaign'. Fair enough; although you may want to bear in mind I am only that which I wish to seem. When it comes to the crunch, I'll adapt, if need be: it is, after all, easier to dumb-down than "limber up"; and in any case, I have thus far experienced no difficulty in directing or orchestrating the Cheltenham Children's Theatre Association, comprised though it is predominantly of pre-pubescents.

Oh, and if you're going to use "big" words, at least use them correctly. "Purport" should be followed by a verb, not a noun (so your sentence above, "I may only purport a certain conceptual awareness", makes no grammatical sense).
Are you sure? The last I heard, 'purport' was synonymous with 'profess'; moreover, I have actually seen it employed in this fashion.

The Oxford English Dictionary has this to say on the matter:

Purport v. & n. - 1. profess; be intended to seem. 2. (often foll. by that + clause) (of a document or speech) have as its meaning; state.

If one can "state an intention", I daresay one may similarly "purport an awareness"; inasmuch as one might with equal legitimacy "declare" or "proclaim" it. That is, unless you would care to argue otherwise.

In a similar vein, there is no such word as succinctitude; I think you meant succinctness.
I know; unfortunately, my linguistic aesthetic disagrees with me (and you), on this count. As far as internet forums and the non-professional, un-regulated wider World are concerned: it's 'succinctitude'. Old stylistic flourishes die hard, as they say.

Going back to your personal statement, legal practise should correctly be legal practice (practise is a verb, practice a noun). I may be nitpicking, but you're the one who asked for examples of your misuse of the English language.
Unfortunately, believing in the infallibility of my then-mentors, I was taught the reverse; and, at the time in writing [my personal statement], still laboured under this self-same misapprehension. Rest assured, however: that discrepancy (embarrassing though it was) has been long-since rectified.

Just one last thing - I do not for a moment believe that Clifford Chance have offered you a training contract. The recruitment of trainee solicitors is regulated by the Law Society and its rules state quite clearly that "offers of employment as a trainee solicitor must not be made before 1 September in the student's final year of undergraduate study" (see here). So next time you try to impress with fictitious achievements, I suggest you do your homework first.
Hmm; and I daresay the vast majority of such cases would involve those who have at least commenced their undergraduate course, too. I was being sarcastic; apologies if this wasn't adequately conveyed either by the statement in question, or the emoticon which succeeded it. In any case, and all significant differences to one side, I'm nonetheless grateful that you would take time out from your schedule to rebuff an upstart such as myself; although, personally, I daresay this time could be better put to use in more constructive endeavours.
0
Profesh
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#47
Report Thread starter 14 years ago
#47
(Original post by beekeeper_)
Besides, the personal statement is spot-on, and it's more than what you would expect from the average barrister.

As for the 'you've got to walk the walk' comment, i'd say if you've got a flare with words like this guy then you've made it anyway.
Let's not jump the gun, shall we? I've already had one training contract snatched, pre-emptively, from my grasp. :rolleyes:
0
Manatee
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#48
Report 14 years ago
#48
Personally, I think there is a compromise to be struck between the plain English you’re referring to (the “dumbing down” of anything is the last thing I would advocate) and your particular style. In other words, there is no need to avoid all words of more than one syllable but equally no need to use ten words when five will do. Useful in exams or with looming deadlines, at least .

Apologies for not spotting the subtle sarcasm in your reference to a training contract. My telepathy just isn’t what it used to be .

Anyway, good luck with your studies and future career. I hope you find the practice of law more satisfying that I did. (I’m taking a break from the law to study for a completely unrelated second degree - hence my reason for visiting this website.)
0
Profesh
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#49
Report Thread starter 14 years ago
#49
(Original post by Manatee)
Personally, I think there is a compromise to be struck between the plain English you’re referring to (the “dumbing down” of anything is the last thing I would advocate) and your particular style. In other words, there is no need to avoid all words of more than one syllable but equally no need to use ten words when five will do. Useful in exams or with looming deadlines, at least .

Apologies for not spotting the subtle sarcasm in your reference to a training contract. My telepathy just isn’t what it used to be .

Anyway, good luck with your studies and future career. I hope you find the practice of law more satisfying that I did. (I’m taking a break from the law to study for a completely unrelated second degree - hence my reason for visiting this website.)
Thanks. The feedback was appreciated.
0
Phonicsdude
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#50
Report 14 years ago
#50
Why didn't you enjoy the law?
0
Manatee
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#51
Report 14 years ago
#51
(Original post by Phonicsdude)
Why didn't you enjoy the law?
Oh dear, that’s a long story… I took the conversion route into the law, and really loved the CPE, a sort of condensed law degree. The more vocational LPC year was less interesting, but that is generally admitted to be the case. I'd accepted a training contract in a Magic Circle firm, partly because of the firm’s perceived prestige and status (yes, I was a bit of a law firm snob in those days), and partly because of the financial support it offered (I would not have been able to afford two years of law school otherwise).

When it came to choosing which department to qualify into at the end of my two years as trainee, my first choice was employment – I felt that it was a more “human” area of the law. Unfortunately there were no vacancies in that department, so I ended up accepting an offer from the corporate finance department instead. I’d enjoyed the time I’d spent there as trainee, it was one of the more friendly departments, and I really thought that I would like it and that it would be a good experience.

The reality proved to be somewhat disappointing. The hours were frequently horrendous. Support and appreciation from partners was pretty much non-existent. I have never been as stressed as I was that year after qualification – as a newly qualified, virtually everything I did was new, but there was a constant pressure not to make any mistakes, along with rumours of what had happened to those who had got things wrong. Unfortunately I’m a natural worrier who finds it difficult to switch off, so the stress of work would inevitably pervade my time away from the office. The work itself was often fairly dull (corporate finance is a pretty dry subject, at least in my opinion) and involved surprisingly little “pure” law; working as a junior lawyer in a commercial department involves quite a bit of paper-pushing (sorting out conditions precedent, preparing documents for signings etc.). Clients and lawyers from other firms could be very difficult to deal with. On the plus side, I did a lot of drafting, which was more creative and interesting, and I did get a definite sense of achievement when a transaction completed to everyone’s satisfaction. The other associates in the department (and the firm) were generally lovely and helpful, and I made some very good friends – most of whom have incidentally also moved on. The financial rewards were…well, very rewarding.

After less than a year, I knew that I wanted to leave. Perhaps things would have been different if I had ended up doing employment rather than corporate finance; who knows. I started toying with the idea of doing a second degree in a subject I’d always found fascinating. I got my place about a month ago and now I can’t wait to use my brain again.

If you’ve managed to read down to here without falling asleep, you have my sincere admiration ! I hope I haven’t painted an overly bleak picture of City law – plenty of people are happy enough doing it and some genuinely love what they do. It’s important to realise, though, that it’s not for everyone - despite what the firms would have you believe, there really is life outside the Magic Circle. So, my unsolicited advice of the day to any aspiring solicitors out there, to borrow a quote from “Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade”: choose wisely!

Right, I’ll stop waffling now.
0
NDGAARONDI
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#52
Report 14 years ago
#52
Now someone knows why I dislike City law. Bring on constitutional law. :cool:
0
Manatee
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#53
Report 14 years ago
#53
(Original post by NDGAARONDI)
Now someone knows why I dislike City law. Bring on constitutional law. :cool:
What's your reason for disliking it?
0
-mb-
Badges: 6
Rep:
?
#54
Report 14 years ago
#54
(Original post by Profesh)
Compare and contrast:

"I have readied this text for your reading."
"I have readied this text for your perusal."

"Notwithstanding this fact."
"Not having failed to take into account this fact."

Need I say more? Such is succinctitude; such is the fallacy of your ill-founded critique.



Indeed. Heaven forbid that I should sound 'ameteurish'; what with my recently-acquired training contract at Clifford Chance, and all.



For lack of space in which to disseminate a treatise as to the particular legal (and concomitant humanitarian) ramifications of emergent "anti-terrorist" policies worldwide, I may only purport a certain conceptual awareness. This is a personal statement, not an essay, for Christ's sake.



Ahem. First off: merely because a given admissions tutor knows 'x', it would be nonetheless quite the miracle of induction for them to therefore assume that I know 'x'. Were such a blinkered philosophy adopted across the board, I should surmise that, if nothing else, exams would become significantly more straightforward: don't be so facile.

Furthermore, precisely what is it that you are attempting to argue here? Might I observe the hypocrisy manifest in your flagrantly amibiguous and rhetorical "critiques" of my style; which are themselves, for lack of a better word, subsumed in baseless rhetoric? Is the 'person reading it', as you state, 'qualified' or 'unknowledgeable'; and, presuming the latter, would they not therefore find my erring on the didactic side to be more elucidating than egregious? 'Nonsensical rhetoric', indeed!

Finally, as to my alleged 'mistakes' (which you have stipulated exist, and yet oh-so constructively neglected to clarify where): these are comprised of a personal statement which has thus far secured me entry to five out of six institutions. Make of that what you will.



Quite; rather, I 'talk it' now, in order that I may 'walk it', in Bristol, pending the advent of October 2005.
lol
:rolleyes:


Why do you think everyone hates lawyers?
0
Wings_cp
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#55
Report 14 years ago
#55
(Original post by -mb-)
lol
:rolleyes:


Why do you think everyone hates lawyers?
Because they and the devil walk hand in hand :evil:
0
jiggaman7
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#56
Report 14 years ago
#56
(Original post by Profesh)
Let's not jump the gun, shall we? I've already had one training contract snatched, pre-emptively, from my grasp. :rolleyes:
do you actually speak like that!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! and noone at school rips you to shreds. you speak like a novel theres no need to either
0
jiggaman7
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#57
Report 14 years ago
#57
also profesh how are you not at some place like oxford. i feel sorry for you that my place for law is LSE is at the expense of a genius!!!!!!!!!
0
Profesh
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#58
Report Thread starter 14 years ago
#58
(Original post by jiggaman7)
do you actually speak like that!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! and noone at school rips you to shreds. you speak like a novel theres no need to either
Inasmuch as there is, perhaps, no 'need' to; there is, nevertheless, every want to: such is expression.

And, as to Law: I'm flattered, but I daresay Bristol will be quite adequate for my purposes. Oxbridge never really tempted me as much as it has others.
0
jiggaman7
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#59
Report 14 years ago
#59
wow u are a genius...i applaud you.hope i never meet you in court id get absolutely annihilated!!!!!!
0
legalbeagle
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#60
Report 14 years ago
#60
Profesh - some advice coming from a person who used to be extremely verbose - cut the crap now, because if you hand in your first law essay (i.e. not A-level) with this contrived language, your tutor will not be impressed. As people have stated above, and I want to reiterate it - there is a place for complex language, but only to be used in balance with cut and thrust simplicity. The law has to be accessible for everyone, not just the few who practise it!
0
X
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

University open days

  • Cardiff Metropolitan University
    Undergraduate Open Day - Llandaff Campus Undergraduate
    Sat, 19 Oct '19
  • Coventry University
    Undergraduate Open Day Undergraduate
    Sat, 19 Oct '19
  • University of Birmingham
    Undergraduate Open Day Undergraduate
    Sat, 19 Oct '19

Why wouldn't you turn to teachers if you were being bullied?

They might tell my parents (23)
6.82%
They might tell the bully (33)
9.79%
I don't think they'd understand (51)
15.13%
It might lead to more bullying (128)
37.98%
There's nothing they could do (102)
30.27%

Watched Threads

View All