A contemporary phenomenon--multiplicity of authentic sources of law in different languages--complicates the process of statutory interpretation. In multilingual jurisdictions, problems arise when a literal interpretation of authentic versions of the law leads to inconsistent outcomes. Jurisdictions resolve such inconsistency in different ways. This article identifies converging trends and diverging practices in multilingual interpretation by comparing various jurisdictions and explains the phenomena by placing the jurisdictions in their social, historical and political contexts. I will then attempt to sketch a typology of legal multilingualism and analyse its significance to interpretation theories. I conclude that legal multilingualism has caused a shift in interpretation dynamics and fuelled a conceptualisation of the law that is distant from the text that formulates it, forcing one to rethink the relationship between language and the law.