Phrasal Verbs in Legal English: Challenging Traditions in British and European Contexts

Phrasal verbs, frequently associated with informal and idiomatic usage, have traditionally been regarded as stylistically incompatible with the conventions of legal English. Despite this perception, their occurrence within legal discourse across both British and European institutional contexts reveals a more complex linguistic reality. This paper presents a corpus-driven investigation into the frequency, distribution, and functional roles of selected phrasal verbs across a diverse range of spoken and written legal texts, including parliamentary proceedings, judicial decisions, and contractual documentation. By analysing national and supranational legal registers, the study identifies patterns that highlight both commonalities and divergences across genres and institutional levels. The findings challenge prevailing assumptions regarding the unsuitability of phrasal verbs in legal language, emphasising that many possess broad, general meanings not exclusively tied to legal contexts. Although formal lexical alternatives remain predominant, the integration of multi-word verb constructions indicates a register that is more flexible and contextually sensitive than traditionally acknowledged. This research offers valuable insights for legal drafting practices and the teaching of English for Legal Purposes, while also bearing implications for legal translation and multilingual legislative environments. Ultimately, it advocates for recognising phrasal verbs as legitimate, and at times indispensable, components of contemporary legal discourse, thereby encouraging a critical re-evaluation of established stylistic conventions.