Glossmen

The traditional solution has been to rely on bilingual legal dictionaries, harmonized glossaries (e.g., the EU’s IATE database), or ad hoc expert testimony. Yet each of these tools suffers from a common flaw: they treat meaning as static, pre-existing, and discoverable rather than negotiated.

[Author, B. B.] (2021). Medieval glossators and modern compliance. Comparative Legal History , 9(1), 88–110. glossmen

Glossmen, lexical mediation, regulatory linguistics, institutional translation, semantic arbitration 1. Introduction Legal and regulatory documents are often described as “closed universes” of meaning, where every term is expected to carry a fixed, jurisdictional definition. However, in practice, terms such as “reasonable,” “material,” or “substantial equivalence” shift meaning across borders, agencies, and professional cultures. This phenomenon—known as semantic drift in regulated language —generates compliance risk, litigation, and delayed approvals. The traditional solution has been to rely on

[Your name if you want to add a simulated self-citation.] (2025). Gloss schema design for financial regulation. Working paper, [Institution]. (Includes fields: Gloss ID, Date, Issuing Glossman(s), Source term & jurisdiction, Target context, Operational boundary, Fallback rule, Party acceptance signatures, Expiration/review date.) [Institution]. (Includes fields: Gloss ID

(Full text of the three hypothetical regulatory pairs and the six low-glossability terms used in the experiment.)

United Nations Commission on International Trade Law. (1980). United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG).