Definition
In legal contexts, NOUN carries two distinct historical meanings drawn from Law French, both of which appear in early English legal records and Year Books:
1. (Law French, from Latin *non*) "Not" or "No." Used as a particle of negation in pleading and dialogue recorded in the Year Books. The phrase *est ceo vostre fait ou noun* — "is this your deed or not?" — illustrates its function as the negative particle in formal legal exchange.
2. (Law French, from Latin *nomen*) "Name" or "a name." Used in legal instruments and formularies to designate the appellation of a person or thing. Appears in this sense in *Fet Assaver* and related early legal texts.
Neither meaning corresponds to the modern English grammatical term. The word functions in these sources purely as a Law French term, not as English vocabulary.
---
Common Language
Modern common usage (Wiktionary): A word that functions as the name of a specific object or set of objects — persons, animals, places, things, phenomena, substances, qualities, or ideas; one of the basic parts of speech in many languages, including English.
Historical common usage (Webster's 1913): "A word used as the designation or appellation of a creature or thing, existing in fact or in thought; a substantive."
The gap here is total. A researcher encountering NOUN in a Year Book or early plea roll is not reading a grammatical label. The word is Law French. Its two legal meanings — negation and name — bear no functional relationship to the part-of-speech concept familiar to modern readers. Treating NOUN in these sources as the English grammatical term will produce a mistranslation.
---
Why It Matters in Research
Researchers working in Year Book materials, Norman French plea rolls, or early formularies such as *Fet Assaver* must recognize NOUN as a Law French particle rather than an English word. The risk of confusion is real: modern readers trained to parse legal texts in English will see NOUN and apply the only meaning they know.
Two traps exist in historical sources. First, the negation sense (*non*) appears frequently in recorded courtroom dialogue — yes-or-no exchanges between judges and parties — and also in Latin maxims that have been partially translated or transliterated into Law French. Second, the name sense (*nomen*) overlaps with related terms like NOMEN, NOM, and NOM DE GUERRE, which also appear in early records and may be rendered inconsistently depending on the scribe.
The maxim appended in Burrill — *Nova constitutio futuris formam imponere debet, non præteritis* ("A new statute ought to prescribe form to future acts, not to those past") — uses Latin *non*, not Law French NOUN, and is included in the Burrill entry only by association. Researchers should not infer that NOUN in Law French sources carries the full semantic range of Latin *non* in maxim literature.
Cross-corpus awareness: this term connects to the broader cluster of Law French negatives and particles (NON, NE, NIENT) that governed pleading language in the medieval English common law courts.
---
Historical Dictionary Support
Burrill's Law Dictionary is the primary source here and treats NOUN with appropriate precision, distinguishing the two Law French senses and anchoring each to a specific text. The Year Book citations (*T. 1 Edw. II*) ground the negation sense in a datable, identifiable source. The reference to *Fet Assaver § 33* grounds the name sense similarly.
What Burrill does not do is warn the modern reader about the collision with English usage — understandably, since in the nineteenth century the risk of confusing a Law French particle with an English grammatical term was less acute. Modern researchers need that warning more than Burrill's audience did.
No other standard historical law dictionaries (Jacob, Tomlin, Black) carry entries for NOUN in the Law French sense. This is consistent with Burrill's comparative depth in Norman French materials, but it means the corpus researcher has limited cross-reference support for this term.
---
Jurisdictional Note
This term is relevant exclusively to English legal history and the historical common law tradition derived from it. It has no operative meaning in modern American, British, or Commonwealth statutory or case law. Jurisdictional variation is not a concern; historical period is.
---