以上單詞均有裁決或裁判者的含義。其中，盡管judge可指很多場(chǎng)合中的裁決者，如judge of the diamond at the show及 judge of the cars等，但在法律語(yǔ)言學(xué)中，嚴(yán)格說(shuō)來(lái)，judge唯一的含義即是“法官”，不論其是經(jīng)指定或任命的而獲得職位的[1]。arbiter和arbitrator均可用作指“仲裁員”，但在這種含義上，后者比前者通用。arbiter屬于書(shū)面語(yǔ)，更常用于指無(wú)正式授權(quán)或職務(wù)，而憑借威望以作裁決或制定標(biāo)準(zhǔn)者。從裁決的方式上看，arbiter受制于法律規(guī)則，而arbitrator則可按自己的判斷行使自由裁量權(quán)[2] (但Arthur A. Leff卻對(duì)此區(qū)別持異議[3])。 在羅馬法中，arbiter還可用作指被授予自由裁量權(quán)的法官，或經(jīng)裁判官（praetor)指定按衡平法規(guī)則審理屬于善意動(dòng)機(jī)類案件 (bona fidei)者。referee 和 umpire 也可用作指 arbitrator;此外, referee還常用作指由法院命令或指定，就未決案件作額外的調(diào)查、取證、聽(tīng)審當(dāng)事人、且提交相關(guān)報(bào)告的專家（或律師）；此種referee的指定可不需有關(guān)當(dāng)事人的同意，此時(shí)，其為“托查官（人)”（即能對(duì)未決事項(xiàng)進(jìn)行聽(tīng)審且將結(jié)果報(bào)告法院的準(zhǔn)司法官，通常為律師，經(jīng)法官任命以處理某事項(xiàng)，源于委托，因其處理之事項(xiàng)是法院專門(mén)“委托”的）W。在用作指仲裁時(shí)， umpire則常表示在兩個(gè)或多個(gè)仲裁員意見(jiàn)不和時(shí)，被指定作終局裁決的“首席仲裁員” [5]。

[1] “ A public official appointed or elected to hear and decide legal matters in court. ” Cf. Bryan A. Gamer, Black's Law Dictionary, 7th edition, at p. 844, West Group (1999). A public official vested with authority to hear，determine, and preside over legal matters brought in court. ” Cf. Linda Picard Wood，J. D. Merriam Websters Dictionary of Law, at p.
267，Merriam-Webster，Incorporated Springfield，Massachusetts (1996 ).

[2] “arbiter: A person chosen to decide a controversy. A person bound to decide according to the rules of law and equity，as distinguished from an arbitrator, who may proceed wholly at his own discretion，so that it be according to the judgment of a sound man. ” Cf. The Publisher's Editorial Staff, Black's Law Dictionary, abridged 6th edition, at p. 69， West Publishing Co. (1991).

[3] “ Sometimes a distinction in sought to be made between an arbiter, who decides according to rules, and an arbitrator, who is free to settle matters in his own sound discretion. But the distinction doesn’t hold; arbiter often have huge moments of discretionary power，and more important，most arbitrators today proceed according to elaborate rules, both procedural and substantive. ”Cf. Arthur A. Leff, The Leff Dictionary of Law, at pp. 1855, 2050, 94 Yale I. J. (1985).