The excessive use of foreign terms and other negative trends in the constitutional law science

The paper covers the analysis and systematization of negative trends related to the methodology and categorical framework of scientific research in the field of constitutional law science. There are very few such studies at the present stage of legal science, and there are practically no such studies in the science of constitutional law. The purpose of the paper is to analyze, systematize, and classify negative trends in scientific research in the field of constitutional law from the point of view of methodology, the conceptual and categorical framework of scientific research and their relationship with the law enforcement practice, as well as the correctness of the language of scientific publications. The author uses historical, sociological, logical, formal legal, system, and comparative approaches, as well as the observation and description methods. The author concludes on the following: 1) the use of foreign-language terms in scientific research can be reasonable or unreasonable; 2) authors introducing and using foreign terms are often guided not by the essence of science as an increment of new scientific knowledge, but by various pseudo-scientific reasons; 3) the increase in the frequency of use of foreign terms is developing into a negative trend cluttering the conceptual and categorical framework of science; 4) the excessive use of foreign terms is a part of the general problem of the state of the conceptual-categorical framework of the constitutional law science; 5) negative trends in the methodology of the constitutional law science affect negatively both its conceptual and categorical framework and the relationship between science and practice, the attitude of legislators and law enforcers to scientific research and science in general.