A legal scholar offers a bold new framework for legal interpretation with this “deep, thoughtful, and useful examination . . . of legal meaning” (William Eskridge, Yale University).

Consider a criminal sentencing provision that calls for enhanced punishment if a defendant “uses” a firearm during a drug crime. Has a defendant violated the provision if he trades a gun for drugs? Did he “use” the gun in the intended sense? This sort of question is at the heart of legal interpretation.

Legal interpretation typically follows the doctrine of “ordinary meaning” —which is to say that words in legal texts should be interpreted in light of accepted standards of communication. Yet often, courts fail to properly consider context, refer to unsuitable dictionary definitions, or otherwise misconceive how the ordinary meaning of words should be determined.

In this book, Brian Slocum argues for a new method of interpretation by asking glaring, yet largely ignored, questions. What makes one particular meaning the “ordinary” one, and how exactly do courts conceptualize the elements of ordinary meaning? Ordinary Meaning provides a much-needed reassessment of how the components of ordinary meaning should properly be identified and developed in our modern legal system.