This article examines the literary and discursive elements shaping the legal language of the Mecelle-i Ahkâm-ı Adliyye through a comparative analysis of Kitâb al-Wadîʿa, which was drafted during the interim phase of the Mecelle Commission but never enacted, and Kitâb al-Amânât, which was prepared and promulgated after Ahmed Cevdet Pasha resumed the presidency of the commission. The main aim of the study is to demonstrate how two texts with identical legal content generate different normative effects through distinct linguistic and discursive strategies. For this purpose, the study adopts a qualitative research design based on comparative textual analysis; the articles of Kitâb al-Wadîʿa and Kitâb al-Amânât are examined article by article in terms of sentence structure, economy of expression, and discursive patterns. Within this framework, the article argues that in the post-Tanzimat codification process, legal language functioned not merely as a technical medium of expression but as a constitutive element producing normative clarity, uniformity of application, and institutional persuasiveness. The transition from Kitâb al-Wadîʿa to Kitâb al-Amânât thus represents an instructive case illustrating how modern Ottoman legal language was consciously constructed through discursive choices rather than substantive change.