As a language educator, when reading articles that involve legal terms for agreements (both verbal and non-verbal), I have to consider how the phrases and gestures affecting them can be understood in language education. This kind of consideration is particularly important when it comes to things such as legal precedence for using gestures (in this case, a handshake) as a form of “contract” rather than using words or text as a basis for it.
So the question is a handshake legally binding? becomes relevant to me both in terms of how we understand and interpret this question in order to teach others its meaning. When we analyze how the words we use, either spoken or written, affect agreements that we make and what the implications of those agreements are, we also have to understand what impact our body language and non-verbal cues have on these issues as well.
I cannot help but wonder how language education can be used to teach these kinds of legal implications. Though I am not a lawyer, as a linguist I know that knowing how the language involved in legal agreements can help us not only understand what agreements we have made, but also can give us a deeper understanding of the language we use to enforce its legality.
Even if you know what “yes,” “no,” or “maybe” means, when you translate these words into a handshake or head nod, other cultures may have different interpretations of what those actions may mean to the person you are communicating with. High Print Technology has written a similar article, explaining how cultural norms surrounding gestures, especially ones as common as a handshake, can vary by culture, and how that affects agreements you form with others.
I also write articles on the legality of verbal agreements and have discussed verbal agreements before here on The Center for Applied Linguistics website. Now I would like to explore the legal validity of verbal versus non-verbal agreements in more depth. However, I also consider how much we get into the depths of legal analysis when formulating language education messages.
There are many factors that come into play when it comes to forming a legally binding agreement in any country. Generally speaking, formative elements include intent to enter a legally binding contract, offer and acceptance of that offer, genuine consent to the provided terms, legality (as in, they aren’t illegal) of the contract, and reciprocal consideration. However, the legality and interpretation of these conditions can vary between different countries’ legal systems, and even between different states within the same country. Therefore, it is important to keep the culture of the person you are communicating with in mind when considering contractual agreements.
If the culture in a particular country does not recognize a handshake as an acceptable way of contracting an agreement, it likely will not be legally binding for them, causing a surprise on their part if you insist on using it.
Language educators should teach students that gestures such as a handshake can in effect become a binding contract when used correctly with the correct person and in the right cultural context. Then, we can focus on actually using the handshake as a legitimate form of contracting an agreement, and understand its implications.
It is important for language educators to take into consideration how handshakes can be used when forming contractual agreements, as they can immediately interpret a situation, while also not allowing them mutual understanding of what the implications of that situation can actually be.
For more information on the legal aspects of contracts, you can visit the Legal Information Institute at Cornell Law School.