artikulueshëm

10:19 Jul 10, 2018 

No need for a long debate on the nuances, since I use your answers to translate into Swedish.

10:58 Jul 9, 2018 

"Articulable" is the literal translation of "artikulueshme", but as an entire phrase "articulable evidence" doesn't sound correct English, not from the viewpoint of a dictionary but from the viewpoint of an English native speaker. It doesn't have sense that every word existent in the English English dictionary, can be used in every kind of context. That's my opinion, based on my experience also as an US English speaker for more than 10 years. However, my opinion is that an English native speaker can have a better judgement if such term "articulable evidence' sounds correct

10:50 Jul 9, 2018 

There is 'explicit TEXTUAL evidence'. The text and the law does not refer only to textual evidence, hence 'explicit' is inappropriately used at least in the given context.

I quoted the word from an English-English dictionary, and I always prefer to rely on such authoritative sources rather than my own experience. The mere fact that one has not encountered a word or has the impression that a word has limited usage has no bearing on making a decision on the adequate word to be used.

10:45 Jul 9, 2018 

"Articulable' is a literal translation of "artikulueshme", but as an entire phrase "articulable evidence" doesn't sound a correct English. As far as I've encountered, 'articulable" has a limited range of use, and it's not encountered in such contexts.

10:40 Jul 9, 2018 

In fact, 'articulable evidence" doesn't sound correct and literal English. "Explicit" is literal and correct English

10:36 Jul 9, 2018 

Not everything explicit is justifiable, that is, articulable.
The link is form the law.

10:20 Jul 9, 2018 

The link was OK, it just didn't open the way I expected

10:10 Jul 9, 2018 

I had to deliver, so I used Jonis' explanation