One to be retained by Party A

sophiasophie

Senior Member
Chinese
Hi,
"This contract is made in duplicate, of which Party A is to retain one counterpart,……". Can I replace "retain" with "held"? Or "retain“ is also not appropriate?
Thanks. Waiting for a reply right here~
 
  • Wordsmyth

    Senior Member
    Native language: English (BrE)
    You could use "keep", which is the normal everyday equivalent of "retain".

    However, contract lawyers would probably argue that "retain" is preferred because it has less variations in meaning than "keep" (although I suspect the real reason is that longer words sound more 'official' than short ones!:D).

    Ws:)
     

    pob14

    Senior Member
    American English
    You could use "keep", which is the normal everyday equivalent of "retain".

    However, contract lawyers would probably argue that "retain" is preferred because it has less variations in meaning than "keep" (although I suspect the real reason is that longer words sound more 'official' than short ones!:D).

    Ws:)
    Which may also explain the use of "counterpart" instead of "copy!"
     

    sophiasophie

    Senior Member
    Chinese
    You could use "keep", which is the normal everyday equivalent of "retain".

    However, contract lawyers would probably argue that "retain" is preferred because it has less variations in meaning than "keep" (although I suspect the real reason is that longer words sound more 'official' than short ones!:D).

    Ws:)
    Yes, keep sounds correct. Thank you.
     

    Glasguensis

    Signal Modulation
    English - Scotland
    The reason for using retain (and counterpart) is that they have an established legal meaning which cannot be challenged in the event of a dispute. It is good practice to stick to these words rather than using synonyms, which may be open to other interpretations. It is not directly a question of the length of the word, but shorter words often have more possible meanings (with the obvious exception of yes and no).
     

    Wordsmyth

    Senior Member
    Native language: English (BrE)
    I agree with Glasguensis. That's pretty much what I was thinking, but expressed in a less flippant way.;)

    As for "copy", sophiasophie, you're right. Both are originals, so strictly speaking neither is a copy, at least in legal parlance (but each one is the counterpart of the other).

    Ws:)
     
    < Previous | Next >
    Top