This work focuses on the relation between language and Law, pointing out the distance that prevails between legal language and the language of the common man. By comparing segments of the Brazilian Civil Code of 1916 with those of the Civil Code of 2002, in regard to Successions Law, issues concerning syntactic structure, use of vocabulary and the presence of structural ambiguities are analyzed. The identification of the main factors responsible for the difficulties faced by the common man in interpreting legal texts is also pursued. By means of an empirical research undertaken with informants, the study establishes that there has been a certain degree of progress, language- wise, in what concerns the Civil Code of 2002, as compared to that of 1916. However, it points out that the degree of progress that has been achieved is far less considerable than that which would be desirable, since, in virtually all cases, the alternative linguistic formulations proposed by the author were preferred over their parallel formulations found in the Civil Code of 2002. The research also provides the identification of linguistic traces which signal axiological changes that have taken place in Brazilian society since the promulgation of the 1916 Code, and which are reflected in that of 2002.The thesis discusses the relation between language and power and calls attention to the perversity of the coexistence of the necessary juridical fiction that no one can be excused of abiding to the law by claiming to ignore it with the perpetuation of an obscure juridical language and the unrestrained proliferation of laws. It thus recommends the adoption of a juridical language that instead of deterring the common man from finding out what his rights and his responsibilities in face of society are, transforms itself in a means of favoring such knowledge.