This paper investigates the actual state of the Russian legal doctrine. We note fairly robust development of social relations, including digital ones. Legal practice requires linguistic means that would accurately define legal concepts, categories, and arrangements and more accurately express the thoughts of a legislator. All this, in turn, creates preconditions for a revamp of legal science. One of the factors affecting the quality of the revamping is the terminological certainty of basic legal concepts, categories, and arrangements. The paper examines ambiguous legal concepts, categories, and arrangements. The author concludes that terminological ambiguity considerably complicates Russian legal doctrine and law enforcement practice and sometimes even lures them to a dead end. The author focuses on a careful approach to borrowing terminology from foreign legal doctrines and concludes that there is a need for a rigorous study, including unification of basic concepts, categories, and arrangements. This could ensure terminological order.
Irina S. Zavyalova (Mon,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: