The Use of 'Use': Legislative Intent, Plain Meaning, & Corpus Linguistics

Abstract

This paper observes the proliferation and difficulties created by purposive interpretation. While interpreting statutes according to their purpose seems on its face a straightforward and reasonable approach, the myth of legislative intent allows for judges to attribute whatever purpose seems best suited to arrive at a desired outcome. Without legislative intent, all that remains is the text of the statute. How do judges determine the plain or ordinary meaning of words in a statute? Dictionaries merely provide a range of options, yet no direction on which meaning may be most appropriate for the context of the case at hand. Corpus linguistics may provide a solution for determining ordinary meaning by compiling empirical evidence from databases of natural language texts. A case study of Smith v United States (1993) examines the ordinary meaning of “use of a firearm” to give an example of how corpus linguistics may provide persuasive arguments when determining ordinary meaning.

Keywords: statutory interpretation; legislative intent; plain meaning; ordinary meaning; corpus linguistics; Smith v United States