Marc Roche

Admin

Legal and Business English Educator & Author

Profile

Join date: Nov 13, 2022

About

Hi, I’m Marc Roche, the founder of Macson Bell. I started this platform with one goal: to make Legal and Business English easier for professionals to master. With years of teaching experience and a passion for language, I’ve had the privilege of helping lawyers, business leaders, and students improve their communication skills and build confidence.

At Macson Bell, I’ve written practical books on topics like legal English, business communication, and professional writing. My focus has always been on providing straightforward, actionable advice—no fluff, just the tools you need to succeed.

When I’m not writing for Macson Bell, you’ll find me contributing to Spain’s largest English-language newspaper, covering everything from local news to global trends. Writing for such a diverse audience has taught me the value of clarity and connection in every word.

Macson Bell is a growing project, and I’m proud to be the driving force behind everything we offer.

My mission is simple: to create resources that make Legal and Business English accessible, practical, and genuinely useful for professionals like you.

Posts (33)

Dec 10, 2025 ∙ 5 min

Pragmatics in Legal Communication: How Implicature Shapes Legal Meaning

Pragmatics in legal communication determines how people interpret intent, subtext, and meaning far beyond the literal words on the page.

Dec 8, 2025 ∙ 5 min

Grice’s Maxims and the Psychology of Legal Communication

Understanding the psychology of legal communication allows lawyers and paralegals to predict how their messages will be interpreted — not just on the surface, but in terms of intent, tone, and implied meaning.

Sep 18, 2025 ∙ 5 min

The Oakhurst Comma Case: A Lesson in Disastrous Legal Ambiguity

In March 2017, a group of dairy drivers in Maine won a $5 million lawsuit because of a missing Oxford comma. The dispute centered on overtime pay, and the absence of one tiny piece of punctuation created enough ambiguity for the court to rule in the workers’ favor.