CONCEPTUAL ORIGINS OF LEGAL LINGUISTICS

Main Article Content

Marcus GALDIA

Abstract

This essay is a survey of methods applied and topics scrutinized in legal-linguistic studies. It starts with the elucidation of the epistemic interest that led to the emergence and to the subsequent expansion of the mainstream legal-linguistic knowledge that we dispose of today. Thus, the essay focuses upon the development of problem awareness in the emerging legal-linguistic studies as well as upon the results of research that might be perceived as the state of the art in the mainstream legal linguistics. Meanwhile, some methodologically innovative tilts and twists that enrich and inspire contemporary legal linguistics are considered as well. Essentially, this essay traces the conceptual landscape in which the paradigms of legal-linguistic studies came about. This conceptual landscape extends from the research into the isolated words of law and the style used by jurists to the scrutiny of legal texts and legal discourses in all their socio-linguistic complexity. Within this broad frame of reference, many achievements in legal-linguistic studies are mentioned in order to sketch the consequences of processes in which legal-linguistic paradigms take shape. The author concludes upon a vision of legal linguistics called pragmatic legal linguistics as the newest stage in the intellectual enterprise that aims to pierce the language of the law and by so doing to understand law better.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

How to Cite
GALDIA, M. (2021). CONCEPTUAL ORIGINS OF LEGAL LINGUISTICS. Comparative Legilinguistics, 47, 17-56. https://doi.org/10.2478/cl-2021-0011
Section
Articles
Author Biography

Marcus GALDIA, International University of Monaco

Associate Professor of Law

References

  1. In the references, only publications concerning general aspects of legal linguistics are listed. Literature concerning specific legal-linguistic issues is provided in Additional materials mentioned in footnotes.
  2. Aarnio, Aulis. 1987. The Rational as Reasonable: A Treatise on Legal Justification. Dordrecht: Reidel.
  3. Andruszkiewicz, Marta. 2016. On Some of the Aspects of the Linguistic Theory of Law. Studies in Logic, Grammar, and Rhetoric vol. 49: 221-229.
  4. Cao, Deborah. 2004. Chinese Law. A Language Perspective. Aldershot: Ashgate.
  5. Cornu, Gérard. 2005. Linguistique juridique. 3d ed. Paris: Montchrestien.
  6. Dworkin, Ronald. 1991. Law’s Empire. London: Fontana Press.
  7. Engberg, Jan, Kjaer, Anne Lise. 2011. Approaches to Language and the Law – Some Introductory Notes. Hermes – Journal of Language and Communication Studies vol. 46: 7-10.
  8. Galdia, Marcus. 2014. Legal Discourses. Frankfurt a.M.: Peter Lang.
  9. Galdia, Marcus. 2017. Lectures on Legal Linguistics. Frankfurt a.M.: Peter Lang.
  10. Galdia, Marcus. 2020. The Comparative Element in Comparative Legal Linguistics. Comparative Legilinguistics vol. 43: 57-76.
  11. Galdia, Marcus. 2021. Legal Constructs. Reflections upon Legal-Linguistic Methodology. Poznań: Wydawnictwo Rys.
  12. Gibbons, John. 2003. Forensic Linguistics. An Introduction to Language in the Justice System. Oxford: Blackwell.
  13. Husa, Jaakko. 2015. A New Introduction to Comparative Law. Oxford/Portland: Hart.
  14. Husa, Jaakko. 2020. Language of Law and Invasive Legal Species – Endemic Systems, Colonisation and Viability of Mixed Law. Global Journal of Comparative Law vol. 9: 149-182.
  15. Jackson, Bernard S. 1985. Semiotics and Legal Theory. London/Boston: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
  16. Kalinowski, George. 1964. Introduction à la logique juridique: éléments de sémiotique juridique, logique des normes et logique juridique. Paris: Librairie générale de droit et de jurisprudence.
  17. Kozanecka, Paulina, Matulewska, Aleksandra, Trzaskawka, Paula. 2017. Methodology of Interlingual Comparison of Legal Terminology. Towards General Legilinguistic Translatology. Poznań: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Contact.
  18. Lindroos, Emilia. 2015. Im Namen des Gesetzes. Eine vergleichende rechtslinguistische Untersuchung zur Formelhaftigkeit in deutschen und finnischen Strafurteilen. Rovaniemi: Lapin yliopisto.
  19. Lizisowa, Maria Teresa. 2016. Komunikacyjna teoria języka prawnego. Poznań: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Contact.
  20. Lundmark, Thomas. 2012. Charting the Divide Between Common and Civil Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  21. Marmor, Andrei. 2014. The Language of Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  22. Mattila, Heikki E.S. 2002. Towards the Science of Legal Linguistics. In The Development of Legal Language, Mattila, H.E.S. (ed.), 167-191. Helsinki: Kauppakaari.
  23. Mattila, Heikki E.S. 2012a. Jurilinguistique comparée: Langage du droit, latin et langages modernes. Montréal: Y. Blais.
  24. Mattila, Heikki E.S. 2012b. Legal Vocabulary. In The Oxford Handbook of Language and Law, Tiersma, P.M., Solan, L.M. (eds.), 27-38. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  25. Mattila, Heikki E.S. 2013. Comparative Legal Linguistics. Language of Law, Latin and Modern Lingua Francas, 2nd ed. Aldershot: Ashgate.
  26. Mattila, Heikki E.S. 2018. Legal Language. In Languages for Special Purposes, Humbley, J., Budin, G., Laurén, C. (eds.), 113-150. Berlin/Boston: W. de Gruyter.
  27. Matulewska, Aleksandra. 2013. Legilinguistic Translatology. A Parametric Approach to Legal Translation. Bern: P. Lang.
  28. Mellinkoff, David. 1963. The Language of the Law. Boston/Toronto: Little, Brown & Co.
  29. Pigolkin, A. S. (ed.). 1990. Jazyk zakona. Moskva: Juridicheskaya literatura.
  30. Poscher, Ralf. 2012. Ambiguity and Vagueness in Legal Interpretation. In The Oxford Handbook of Language and Law, Tiersma P.M., Solan L.M. (eds.), 128-144. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  31. Salmi-Tolonen, Tarja. 2008. Language and the Functions of Law. Rovaniemi: University of Lapland.
  32. Sourioux, Jean-Louis, Lerat, Pierre. 1975. Le langage du droit. Paris: Presses universitaires de France.
  33. Tiersma, Peter M. 1999. Legal Language. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  34. Additional materials mentioned in footnotes
  35. Aarnio, Aulis. 1989. Das regulative Prinzip der Gesetzesauslegung. Überlegungen zum Problem der Möglichkeit der einzig richtigen Entscheidung, Rechtstheorie vol. 20: 409-431.
  36. Alexy, Robert. 1983. Theorie der juristischen Argumentation. Frankfurt a.M.: Suhrkamp.
  37. Andruszkiewicz, Marta. 2021. The Heritage of Cultural Determinants of Law and Literature: Methodological Findings, International Journal for the Semiotics of Law 34: 611-621. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11196-020-09743-4.
  38. Austin, John Langshaw.1962. How to Do Things with Words? Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  39. Beaudoin, Louis. 2002. Legal Translation in Canada. In The Development of Legal Language, H.E.S. Mattila (ed.), 115-130. Helsinki: Kauppakaari.
  40. Benedetti, Giuseppe. 1999. Diritto e linguaggio. Variazioni sul ‘diritto muto’, Europa e diritto privato vol. 1: 137-152.
  41. Broekman, Jan M. 1984. Text als Institution. In Rechtstheorie, Supplement 6, Recht als Sinn und Institution, 145-167.
  42. Chan, Ho-yan. 2014. 两岸三地 (Liang An San Di), vol. 1. Hong Kong: City University of Hong Kong Press.
  43. Chan, Ho-yan. 2015. 两岸三地 (Liang An San Di), vol. 2. Hong Kong: City University of Hong Kong Press.
  44. Chan, Ho-yan. 2017. 两岸三地 (Liang An San Di), vol. 3. Hong Kong: City University of Hong Kong Press.
  45. Dölle, Hans. 1949. Vom Stil der Rechtssprache. Tübingen: Mohr.
  46. Felder, Ekkehard, Vogel, Friedemann (eds.) 2017. Handbuch Sprache im Recht. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
  47. Frändberg, Åke. 2001. Rättsordningen och rättstillämpningen. In Svensk rätt – en översikt, ed. Strömholm, S., 7-26. Uppsala: Justus.
  48. Gaakeer, Jeanne. 2012. On the Study Methods of Our Time: Methodologies of Law and Literature. In Intersections of Law and Culture, Gisler, B., Borella, S.S., Wiedmer, C. (eds.), 133-149. UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
  49. Galdia, Marcus. 1998. Lakisaksa, in: Encyclopaedia Iuridica Fennica, vol. VI, Kansainväliset suhteet. 550-555. Helsinki: Suomalainen Lakimiesyhdistys.
  50. Galdia, Marcus. 2013. Strategies and Tools for Legal Translation. Comparative Legilinguistics vol. 16: 13-29.
  51. Geer, Louis de. 1985 (1853). Om den juridiska stilen. Stockholm: Rediviva.
  52. Gény, François. 1921. Science et technique en droit privé positif, vol. 3. Paris: Sirey.
  53. Goodman, Nelson. 1978. Ways of Worldmaking. Indianapolis: Hackett Publ.
  54. Gotti, Maurizio. 2012. Text and Genre. In The Oxford Handbook of Language and Law, Tiersma P.M., Solan L.M. (eds.), 53-66. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  55. Goźdź-Roszkowski, Stanisław. 2011. Patterns in Linguistic Variation in American Legal English. A Corpus-Based Study. Frankfurt a.M.: P. Lang.
  56. Großfeld, Bernhard. 1997. Sprache und Schrift als Grundlage unseres Rechts, Juristenzeitung 1997/633-646.
  57. Großfeld, Bernhard. 1990. Unsere Sprache: Die Sicht des Juristen. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag.
  58. Grunau, Martin. 1961. Spiegel der Rechtssprache. Flensburg: Verlag Kurt Gross.
  59. Habermas, Jürgen. 1981. Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns, vol. 1 and 2. Frankfurt a.M.: Suhrkamp.
  60. Hare, R.M. 1952. The Language of Morals. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
  61. Hart, H.L.A. 1961. The Concept of Law. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
  62. Husa, Jaakko. 2007. Kreikan oikeus ja oikeuskieli. Helsinki: Suomalainen Lakimiesyhdistys.
  63. Javornik-Čubrić, Marijana. 2018. Što je pravna lingvistika, Lingua Montenegrina vol. 22: 31-37.
  64. Kubacki, Artur Dariusz. 2014. Pluricentryzm w niemieckim języku standardowym i specjalistycznym, Comparative Legilinguistics vol. 17: 163-181.
  65. Laurén, Christer. 2002. Iconism and Special Language. In The Development of Legal Language. Mattila, H.E.S. (ed.), 11-20. Helsinki: Kauppakaari.
  66. Leveneur, Laurent (ed.) 2016. Dossier spécial. Code civil. Projet de réforme du droit des contracts, du régime général et de la preuve des obligations. Paris: LexisNexis.
  67. Mimin, Pierre. 1970. Le style des jugements. 4th ed. Paris: Librairies Techniques.
  68. Nowak-Michalska, Joanna. 2012. Modalność deontyczna w języku prawnym na przykładzie polskiego i hiszpańskiego kodeksu cywilnego. Poznań: Wydawnictwo Rys.
  69. Perelman, Chaim, Olbrechts-Tyteca, Lucie. 1958. Traité de l’argumentation – La nouvelle rhétorique. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.
  70. Prieto Ramos, Fernando. 2015. Quality Assurance in Legal Translation: Evaluating Process, Competence and Product in the Pursuit of Adequacy, International Journal for the Semiotics of Law vol. 28 (1): 11-30. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11196-014-9390-9.
  71. Ross, Alf. 1966. Om ret og retfærdighed. En indførelse i den analytiske retsfilosofi. København: Nyt Nordisk Forlag K. Busck.
  72. Schauer, Frederick (ed.). 1993. Law and Language. Aldershot/Hong Kong: Dartmouth.
  73. Schönherr, Fritz. 1985. Sprache und Recht. Aufsätze und Vorträge. Wien: Manz‘sche Verlags- und Universitätsbuchhandlung.
  74. Schroeder, François Michel. 1978. Le nouveau style judiciaire. Paris: Dalloz.
  75. Shaw, Julia A. 2011. The Continuing Relevance of Ars Poetica to Legal Scholarship and Modern Lawyer, International Journal for the Semiotics of Law vol. 25/1: 71-93.
  76. Tiersma, Peter M., Solan, Lawrence M. (eds.) 2012. The Oxford Handbook of Language and Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  77. Vogel, Friedemann (ed.) 2019. Legal Linguistics Beyond Borders: Language and Law in a World of Media, Globalisation and Social Conflict. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot.
  78. Wedberg, Birger. 1928. Lagstil. Några citat och reflektioner. Stockholm: Norsted.
  79. Weihofen, Henry. 1980. Legal Writing Style. 2nd ed. St. Paul: West Publishing Co.
  80. Weisberg, Richard. 1992. Poethics and Other Strategies of Law and Literature. New York: Columbia University Press.
  81. Wright, Georg Henrik von. 1951. Deontic Logics, Mind vol. 60: 1-15.