Legal Meaning and the Insufficiency of Language

Language philosopher Bry Willis explores the Language Insufficiency Hypothesis, arguing that legal systems falsely treat words as precise instruments despite the inherent instability of language. The author critiques how courts rely on dictionaries, punctuation rules, and corpus linguistics to manufacture definitive meanings where none naturally exist. Through various case studies, the source illustrates a "repair cascade" where every attempt to stabilise a term merely shifts the ambiguity to a new authority. Ultimately, the piece suggests that law is an exercise of power rather than linguistic discovery, as judges must eventually impose definitions to function. This perspective challenges textualism, asserting that the legal order relies on the "Humpty Dumpty" approach of declaring meaning by sovereign decree. 👉 https://philosophics.blog/2026/05/28/i-told-you-so-your-honour