Therefore, learning English in China without professional orientation is a waste of time. In a word, English is the key. If you polish and wax your keys every day, add gold and silver, but never know

Therefore, learning English in China without professional orientation is a waste of time. In a word, English is the key. If you polish and wax your keys every day, add gold and silver, but never know which door to open, you are a "pure Englishist", which is basically synonymous with a fool. 2. I am opposed to the "great book doctrine" that is too ambitious. When learning legal English, you must be down-to-earth and learn from the basics. The basis is the textbook. The textbook has two characteristics: (1) It introduces basic professional vocabulary, logical classification and reasoning process; (2) It enables readers to have an overall grasp of a subject. Famous books and classics often summarize and criticize past knowledge, and then propose new theories and new perspectives. Therefore, these books are not suitable for beginners to read as introductory textbooks. Because, without these basic knowledge and background information as a basis, I spent a long time and was still confused. For example, the Chinese legal community has been discussing a lot about fairness and efficiency. The basic question is: "Should we make the cake bigger first (efficiency) or divide the cake equally (equity)?" Around this issue, various classics and classics on law and economics are flying all over the place. If you want to study this issue, you should actually first read a jurisprudence textbook to understand the definition of "fairness"; then read an economics textbook to understand what "efficiency" is. Then let’s look at the initiator of this controversy, the historical background of this theory put forward by the American “School of Economic Analysis”. Then you can really understand "what are they talking about?" In this way, you will find that the key issue lies in the proposal of the "transaction cost" theory. Then, we ask: How high are the transaction costs of Chinese law? Are they so high that they affect efficiency? Therefore, it is recommended that students calm down and read a few textbooks to understand the basic theories and concepts before reading so-called classics, authoritative works, and masterpieces. At this point, there is no difference between using Chinese to study law and using English to study law. 3. I am opposed to the "template doctrine" that does not seek comprehensive explanations. Translating legal documents with the help of English-Chinese dictionaries, and learning legal English through "Selected Foreign Trade Letters" or "Foreign Contract Models" can be "quickly learned" but cannot be mastered. In addition, the "model" is not standardized, and there are many mistranslations, misinterpretations, and far-fetched interpretations. When I was working as a lawyer in China, I saw many contract texts translated by "translation companies". The number of errors was surprising. The reason is simple: words only have meaning within a specific context. The embarrassing situation encountered by legal English learners is that most legal vocabulary in Chinese and English cannot be accurately translated into each other. For example, the word "legal person" as I once explained in the forum cannot be translated as "legalperson" because "legalperson" in common law refers to a person who can independently bear legal consequences, including both natural persons and legal persons. Therefore, legal person should be translated as "bodycorporate". Therefore, the template is for emergency use or reference, but cannot be used as learning materials. The best teaching material is a textbook (Textbook). In addition, it is best to have an English legal dictionary on hand, which contains English explanations of legal terms, and try not to use an English-Chinese legal dictionary or use it less often. I have used three English-Chinese legal dictionaries, all of which are forced translations without explanations of relevant entries. For example: "tribunal" is defined in the "English-Chinese Legal Dictionary" published by Law Press as (1) court, tribunal; (2) judge's bench, judge's bench; (3) referee, criticism. If "proceedingsincourtoflawortribunal" appears in a legal document, how should it be translated? If, according to the dictionary, this sentence is translated as "a proceeding in a court or tribunal," what exactly does it mean? What is a "tribunal"? In fact, the word tribunal is opposite to the court, and refers to the administrative discretionary agency, that is, an agency that is independent from the court and has the power to conduct substantive review (merits review) of administrative actions. (Note: China does not have similar agencies, so it cannot be translated literally) 4. I oppose the principle of "the more the better". The laws of English-speaking countries all inherit the British common law tradition, including both statutory law (statute) and case law (caselaw).A small country like New Zealand has more "laws" printed than Sikuquanshu, and the number is still increasing. Don’t mention that the United States, Canada, and Australia still have federal legislation and state legislation! Therefore, even the Supreme Court judge of Australia dare not say that he is proficient in "law" (unless he drinks too much). We Chinese learners cannot expect too much. Therefore, even if it is a legal book, you must be selective and not read too complicated. If you are interested in contract law, it is recommended to study the General Introduction to Contract Law first. After passing it, read the chapters on contract law (such as goods purchase and sale contracts, technology transfer licensing contracts, etc.). The professional orientation mentioned above also includes professional choices within the law. Focusing on one or two legal departments, supplemented by other related departments, is a smart and effective learning method. Sometimes the constitution, sometimes criminal law, sometimes international law, which may seem fancy, are just fancy tricks. In addition, there are some so-called legal English textbooks in China, which consist of a patchwork of articles with annotations and translations. They are neither systematic nor focused. This kind of reading material can only be regarded as English teaching materials and cannot be used as law books for learning. Since we cannot learn Chinese law by reading legal abstracts, we cannot learn English law in this way. Summary: (1) Learning legal English is to learn law in English, not to learn English by reading legal materials. Therefore, you must learn by legal methods; you cannot learn by language. Therefore, I oppose the "pure English" doctrine; (2) The legal method is to start from the basics, find the logical starting point of legal development, understand the specific meaning of nouns and terms, and grasp the overall structure of the legal unit. The only thing that can fulfill this requirement is a textbook. Therefore, I am opposed to the doctrine of "masterpieces." (3) Knowing what it is but not knowing why it is the case is "the study of remembering questions." The ancients said, "The study of remembering questions is not enough to be a teacher." Because memorizing it back and forth is other people's things and there is no one's own experience. , not real knowledge. The same goes for learning legal English. Therefore, I oppose "template" doctrine. (4) Finally, the law covers a wide range of areas. Therefore, there must be professional orientation, choices, trade-offs, priorities, and priorities. Plan your limited time well. Otherwise, your efforts will be wasted and nothing will be accomplished. Therefore, I reject the “more is better” doctrine.