Keywords
Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL)
Sentiment Legal Analysis (SLA)
Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA)
Global English for Legal Studies (GELS)
Interdiscursivity
How to Cite
Abstract
With the spread of the language and law theory in comparative constitutional law scholarship, the hegemony of the English language has often been overestimated, to the detriment of national cultural and linguistic identities. The worldwide ramifications of this reality, and in particular the related compelling role of the global dimension of the English language (Global English), have not entirely prevented the highly valuable process of adapting English to local needs. However, this aspect is still under-explored if we consider two related issues that are quite challenging: the perspective of Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA), which emphasizes the relationship between language and power, and the open-ended meanings of the languages spoken within national jurisdictions that encompass a variety of domains, with their multiple versions, idioms, or ‘Englishes’ of the Outer or Expanding Circle. Trying to respond to the transitional challenge of the role of English language in the field of comparative law studies, this paper elaborates some practical methodological suggestions. They are meant to promote a more pluralistic, legal-linguistic understanding of comparative constitutional law to attain an updated legal literacy in teaching (Content and Language Integrated Learning – CLIL) and research (Sentiment Legal Analysis – SLA) in the era of new technologies. Outlining the framework for the rigorous practice of interdiscursivity, it thus pursues the following normative arguments: (i) Achieving a balance between a common global register and nuances of meaning related to local areas requires a methodological design that considers context, legal discourse, and an interdisciplinary approach; (ii) Using the expanded field of SLA in constitutional law contributes to an updated investigation on English as a Court language; (iii) Taking judicial language as a case study of English-language court discourse in continental systems encourages research into the subjectivity of idiomatic and cultural expressions relating to the national identity of judicial attitudes.
References
Abimbola, B. (2024). Enhancing Legal Sentiment Analysis: A Convolutional Neural Network-Long Short-Term Memory Deciment-Level Model. Mach. Learn. Knowl. Extr., no. 6.
Abimbola, B., Tan, Q. & De La Cal Marín (2024). E.A. Sentiment analysis of Canadian maritime case law: a sentiment case law and deep learning approach. Int. j. inf. tecnol. 16.
A Complete Guide to Natural learning processing. https://www.deeplearning.ai/resources/natural-language-processing/ .
Alptekin, C. & Alptekin, M. (1984). The question of culture: EFL teaching in non-English speaking countries. ELT Journal, 38(1).
Andrus, J. (2011). Beyond texts in context: Recontextualization and the co-production of texts and contexts in the legal discourse, excited utterance exception to hearsay. Discourse & Society, 22(2).
Appadurai, A. (1996). Modernity At Large: Cultural Dimensions of Globalization. University of Minnesota Press.
Appadurai, A. (2013). The Future as Cultural Fact: Essays on the Global Condition. Verso.
Ash, E. & Chen, D. L. (2017). Judge embeddings: toward vector representations of legal belief. Technical Report.
Ash, E. & Macleod, W. B. (2021). Reducing partisanship in judicial elections can improve judge quality: evidence from US state supreme courts. Journal of Public Economics.
Ash, E. et al. (2022). Measuring Judicial Sentiment: Methods and Application to US Circuit Court. Economica.
Bakhtin, M. (1981). The dialogic imagination. University of Texas Press.
Bakhtin, M. (1986). Speech genres and other late essays. University of Texas Press.
Barak, A. (2002). A Judge on Judging: The Role of a Supreme Court in A Democracy. Harvard Law Review Association.
Barak, A. (2006). The Judge in a Democracy. Princeton University Press.
Baratta, A. (2019). World Englishes in English language teaching. Palgrave Macmillan.
Barbera, A. (2024). La Costituzione come bene comune, Inaugural Speech by the Chief Justice of the Constitutional Court Augusto Barbera, Rimini Meeting 2024 on “If we are not looking for the essential then what are we looking for?”, August 23, 2024, at https://www.youtube.com/live/ow7BwqWxcuM?si=tFi_KMJROJHiyQ4S.
Barbisan, B. (2022). Patriottismo costituzionale. Il caso italiano in prospettiva comparata. Editoriale Scientifica.
Barbisan, B. Writing Styles, Voices for the Ear. Judges/Justices vs Law Professors in the U.S. Legal Tradition. In Tieghi, G. (ed.), Comparative Law and Global English for Legal Studies. A Law-Linguistic Journey. Jovene.
Barsotti, V. (2008). The Importance of Being Open: Lessons from Abroad for the Italian Constitutional Court. 8 Italian J. Pub. L. 28.
Barsotti, V. et al. (2016). Italian Constitutional Justice in Global Context. OUP USA.
Barsotti, V. et al. (2021). Introduction. Dialogue as a Method. In Barsotti, V. et al. (eds), Dialogues on Constitutional Justice. Comparative Reflections on the Italian Style. Routledge.
Bassetti, P. & D’Aquino, N. (2010). Italic Lessons: An Ongoing dialogue. Bordighera.
Bassetti, P. (2015). Svegliamoci italici! Manifesto per un futuro glocal. Marsilio. En. tr. (2017). Let’s Wake Up, Italics! A Manifesto for a Glocal Future. Calandra Institute.
Baum, L. (2009). The Puzzle of Judicial Behavior. University of Michigan Press.
Bauman, Z. (2005). Globalizzazione e glocalizzazione. Armando Ed.
Bauman, Z. (2013). Glocalization and Hybridity. Glocalism: Journal of Culture, Politics and Innovation, V.1.
Bergonzini G., & Tieghi, G. (2023). Sull’autorevolezza del Giudice costituzionale. Riflessioni conclusive. In Bergonzini, G. et al. Corte costituzionale in pubblico. L’autorevolezza del giudice. Jovene.
Bergonzini, G. et al. (2023). Corte costituzionale in pubblico. L’autorevolezza del giudice. Jovene.
Bertolissi M. (2023). L’udienza pubblica dinanzi alla Corte costituzionale. In Bergonzini, G. et al. Corte costituzionale in pubblico. L’autorevolezza del giudice. Jovene.
Bhatia, V. K. (2004). Worlds of Written Discourse. Continuum.
Bhatia, V. K. et al. (eds.). (2008). Language, Culture and the Law. The formulation of legal concepts across languages and cultures. Peter Lang.
Biel, L. & Engberg, J. (2013). Research Models and Methods in Legal Translations. Linguistica Antverpiensia, New Series – Themes in Translation Studies.
Bolton, K. (2013). World Englishes, globalisation, and language worlds. In Johannesson N.L. & Melchers, G. (eds.), Of butterflies and birds, of dialects and genres: Essays in honour of Philip Shaw. Acta Universitatis Stockholmiensis, Centre for Global Englishes, Southampton University.
Bonfiglio, S. (2020). Intercultural Constitutionalism. From Human Rights Colonialism to a New Constitutional Theory of Fundamental Rights. Routledge.
Breda, V. (2025). Terra Australis Incognita: A Comparative Outlook. DPCE Online, no. 1/2025.
Breda,V. (2017). The Objectivity of Judicial Decisions. A Comparative Analysis of Nine Jurisdictions. Peter Lang Edition.
Buchanan, B. & Headrick, T. (1970). Some Speculations about Artificial Intelligence and Legal Reasoning. Stanford Law Review, vol. no. 23.
Carducci, M. (2003). Tecniche costituzionali di Argomentazione Normazione Comparazione. Pensa MultiMedia.
Cassese, S. (2015). Dentro la Corte. Diario di un giudice costituzionale. Il Mulino.
Castilho, S. et al. (2018). Approaches to human and machine translation quality assessment. In Moorkens, J. et al. (eds.), Translation Quality Assessment: From Principles to Practice. Springer.
Corte Costituzionale Italiana. Official website: Introduction to the English Version. https://www.cortecostituzionale.it/jsp/consulta/istituzioni/PresentazioneCorte_EN.do.
Cortese G. & Duszak, A. (eds.). (2005). Identity, Community, Discourse: English in Intercultural Settings. Peter Lang.
Crystal, D. (2001). Language and the Internet. Cambridge University Press.
Crystal, D. (2003). English as a Global Language. Cambridge University Press.
Dalal, B. A. (2023). The Medium of Language is English in Indian Judiciary: Issues and Challenges. Russian Law Journal, Vol. XI, Issue 1.
De Visser, M. (2022). Towards a more Inclusive Constitutional Discourse: Overcoming Linguistic Barriers. ‘Int’l J. Const. L. Blog. http://www.iconnectblog.com/2022/05/towards-a-more-inclusive-constitutional-discourse-overcoming-linguistic-barriers/.
Della Porta, D. & Keating, M. (2008). Approaches and Methodologies in Social Science: A Pluralist Perspective. Cambridge University Press.
Diaz Pérez, W. et al. (2018). Innovations and Challenges: Conceptualizing CLIL Practice. Theory Into Practice, 57(3).
Draca, M. & Schwaez, C. (2019). How Polarized are Citizens? Measuring Ideology from the Ground-up. Working Paper, University of Warwick.
E Ash, E. et al. (2020). Ideas have Consequences: the Impact of Law and Economics on American Justice. Center for Law & Economics, Working Paper no. 4.
Eliot, L. (2020). AI and Legal Reasoning Essentials. LBE Press Publishing.
Eliot, L. B. (2020). Legal Sentiment Analysis and Opinion Mining (LSAOM): Assimilating Advances in Autonomous AI Legal Reasoning. https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/2010/2010.02726.pdf.
Fairclough, N. (2013). The Critical Discourse Analysis: The Critical Study of Language. Routledge.
Ferrari, G. F. (2014). “Civil law” e “common law”: aspetti pubblicistici. In Carrozza, P. et al. (eds.), Diritto costituzionale comparato, Tomo II. Laterza.
Ferrari, G. F. (2019). (ed.). Judicial Cosmopolitanism. The Use of Foreign Law in Contemporary Constitutional Systems. Martinus Nijhoff.
Ferrari, G. F. (2019). Introduction: Judicial Constitutional Comparison and Its Varieties. In Ferrari, G. F. (ed.), Judicial Cosmopolitanism. The Use of Foreign Law in Contemporary Constitutional Systems. Martinus Nijhoff.
Ferrari, G. F. (2022). Characteristics of the State. In Ferrari, G. F.(ed.), Introduction to Italian Public Law. Giuffrè.
Ferrari, G. F. (2023). I diritti nel costituzionalismo globale: luci e ombre. Mucchi.
Ferrari, G. F. (2024). Preface. In Tieghi, G. (ed.), Comparative Law and Global English for Legal Studies. A Law-Linguistic Journey. Jovene.
Gageler, S. (2014). Why Write Judgments ?. 36 Sydney Law Review 189.
Gal, S. (2023). Language Ideologies. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Linguistics.
Galloway, N. & Rose, H. (2021). The global spread of English and global Englishes language Teaching. In Selvi, A. F. & Yazan, B. (Eds.), Language teacher education for global Englishes: A practical book. Routledge.
Garoupa, N. et al. (eds.). (2021). High Courts in Global Perspective. Evidence, Methodologies, and Findings. University of Virginia Press.
Gentzkow, M. et al. (2019). Measuring group differences in high-dimensional choices: method and application to congressional speech. Econometrica, 87(4).
Gobbo, M. (2024). Searching for the Ancient Linguistics Roots of the Common Law: Some Very Personal Considerations on the Osmosis amongst Legal Cultures. In Tieghi, G. (ed.), Comparative Law and Global English for Legal Studies. A Law-Linguistic Journey, Jovene.
Golledge, E. & Tieghi, G. (2024). Educating Young Generations on Law & Justice Experiential Learning: A Comparative Perspective ‘in dialogue’. In Tieghi, G. (ed.), Comparative Law and Global English for Legal Studies. A Law-Linguistic Journey. Jovene.
Goodrich, P. (1984) Law and Language: An Historical and Critical Introduction. Journal of Law & Society, vol. II, no. 2.
Goodrich, P. (1984). The Role of Linguistics in Legal Analysis. Modern L.R., no. 47.
Goodrich, P. (1992). Legal Discourse. Macmillan.
Graddol, D. (1997). The Future of English. The British Council.
Gray, B. & Biber, D. (2011) Corpus Approaches to the Study of Discourse. In K Hyland K. & Patridge B. (eds.), Continuum Companion to Discourse Analysis. Continuum International Publishing Group.
Griswold, W. (2004). Cultures and Societies in a Changing World, II ed. Sage Publications.
Groppi, T., Ponthoreau, M.C. & Spigno, I. (2025). (eds.), Judicial Bricolage. The Use of Foreign Precedents by Constitutional Judges in the 21st Century. Hart Publishing.
Groppi, T. (2023). Giurisdizione costituzionale e opinione pubblica nella rivoluzione digitale. Dalla comunicazione delle decisioni alla promozione della cultura costituzionale. Quaderni costituzionali, 1.
Groppi, T. & Lecis Cocco Ortu, A. M. (2021). Openness and Transparency in the Constitutional Adjudication: Amici Curiae, Third-Parties Intervention and Facts-Finding Powers. In Barsotti, V. et al. (eds.). Dialogues on Constitutional Justice. Comparative Reflections on the Italian Style. Routledge.
Groppi, T. (2019). Towards Openness and Transparency: Recent Developments in the ‘Italian-Style’ Constitutional Justice. Journal of Public Law, vol. 11, no. 2.
Groppi, T. & Ponthoreau, M.C. (2013). (eds.), The Use of Foreign Precedents by Constitutional Judges. Hart Publishing.
Gulcehre, C. et al. (2017). On Integrating a Language Model into Neural Machine Translation. Comput. Speech Lang., vol. 45.
Gupta, I., Chatterjee, I. & Gupta, N. (2023). A Two-staged NLP-based Framework for Assessing the Sentiments on Indian Supreme Court Judgments. Int. j. inf. tecnol. 15.
Helsloot, N. & Hak, T. (2007). Pêcheux's Contribution to Discourse Analysis’. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research.
Husa, J. (2022). Interdisciplinary Comparative Law. Edward Elgar.
Hyland, K. & Patridge, B. (2011). Introduction. In K Hyland K. & Patridge B. (eds.), Continuum Companion to Discourse Analysis. Continuum International Publishing Group.
Kachru, B. B. (1985). Standards, codification and sociolinguistic realism: The English language in the outer circle. In Quirk, R. & Widdowson, H. (Eds.), (1985). English in the World: Teaching and learning the language and literatures. CUP Press.
Kachru, B. B. (1989). Teaching World Englishes. Indian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 15 (1).
Kachru, Y. & Smith, L.E. (2008) Cultures, Contexts and the World Englishes. Routledge.
Keane, P. (2014). The Idea of the Professional Judge: The Challenges of Communication (Speech delivered at Judicial Conference of Australia Colloquium, Noosa, 11 October 2014).
Kern, C.A. (2012). English as a Court Language in Continental Courts. Erasmus Law Review, Vol. 5, Issue 3.
Khanna, P. (2016). Connectography, Mapping the Future of Global Civilization. Random House.
Klein, C.F. (2019). Preface. In Blengino, C. & Gascòncuenca, A. (eds.). Epistemic Communities at the Boundaries of Law: Clinics as A Paradigm in the European Mediterranean Context. Le Edizioni.
Klinytskyi, I. (2022). Language Rights and Official Languages in Constitutionalism. Do bilingual states give us more rights for our language?. Scientific Journal of Bielsko-Biala School of Finance and Law, vol. 26, no. 4.
Klinytskyi, I. (2022). Language Rights and Official Languages in Constitutionalism. Do bilingual states give us more rights for our language?. ASEJ.
Kong, L. (2022). Artificial intelligence-based translation technology in translation teaching. Comput. Intell. Neurosci.
Kozlowski, A. C. et al. (2019). The geometry of culture: analyzing the meanings of class through word embeddings. American Sociological Review, 84(5).
Kurylo, A. (2013). Inter/cultural Communication: Representation and Construction of Culture. SAGE Publications, Inc.
Lee, R. (2013). Sonia Sotomayor: Role Model of Empathy and Purposeful Ambition. Reviewing My Beloved World by Sonja Sotomayor (2013), Minnesota Law Review Headnotes.
Liu, B. (2010). Sentiment Analysis and Subjectivity. In Indurkhya, N. & Damerau, F. J. (eds.), Handbook of Natural Language Processing. Chapman and Hall/CRC.
Lynch, A. & Tieghi, G. (2025). Judicial Independence and Individuality: Liberty as a Paradigm Shift from ‘Judicial to People’ Voicing Disagreement. DPCE Online, no. 1/2025.
Maley, Y. (1985). Judicial Discourse: The Case of the Legal Judgment. (Festschrift in Honour of A. Delbridge, Beitrage zur Phonetik und Linguistik.
Manaj, L. S. (2017). Intercultural translation and communication. Eur.J. Social Sci. Educ. Res., vol. 11, no. 1.
Marsh, D. (2009). Content and Language Integrated Learning: Leveraging Cultural Diversity. In Gimeno, M. & Carrio Pastor (eds.). Content and language Integrated Learning: Cultural Diversity. Linguistic Series, Studies in language and Communication, Vol. 92. Peter Lang.
Marsh, D. et al. (2015). CLIL in Action: Voices from the Classroom. Cambridge Scholar Publishing.
Marsh, D. et al., (2010). CLIL Practice: Perspectives from the Field. England.
Maveety N.L. (ed.). (2002). The Pioneers of Judicial Behavior. University of Michigan Press.
McArthur, T. (1998). The English Languages. Cambridge University Press.
Mehisto, P. (2012). Excellence in Bilingual Education: A Guide for School Principals. Cambridge University Press.
Merryman, J. H. (1965). The Italian Style: Doctrine. 18 Stanford Law Review.
Merryman, J. H. (1966). The Italian Style: Interpretation. 18 Stanford Law Review.
Merryman, J. H. (1966). The Italian Style: Law. 18 Stanford Law Review.
Mewald, C. (2007). A comparison of oral foreign language proficiency performance of learners in CLIL and mainstream classes at lower secondary level. In Dalton, C. at al. (eds.). Empirical Perspectives on CLIL Classroom Discourse. Peter Lang.
Michaels, R. (2009). Global Legal Pluralism. Annual Review of Law & Social Science, no.5.
Midgley, G. et al., (2017). Dealing with challenges to methodological pluralism: The paradigm problem, psychological resistance and cultural barriers. Industrial Marketing Management, no. 62.
Millar, R. (1955). Book Review to Calamandrei, P. Judicial Procedure and Democracy. 50 Northwestern Univ. Law, Review.
Mohamed, Y. et al. (2024). The Impact of Artificial Intelligence on Language Translation: A Review. IEEE Access, Vol. 12.
Navot, S. (2014). The Invisible Problem of Language in Comparative Constitutional Law’. 25 King’s Law Journal.
Oderkerk, M. (2015). The Need for a Methodological Framework for Comparative Legal Research: Sense and Nonsense of “Methodological Pluralism” in Comparative Law. Rabels Zeitschrift für ausländisches und internationales Privatrecht.
Palitana, S. A., Sharma, K., Vakharia H., Dmonte, S. (2020). Predicting Decisions for Indian Court Cases Using Sentiment Analysis. International Journal of Research and Analytical Reviews, Vol. 7, Issue 2.
Passaglia, P. (2018). La comunicazione istituzionale degli organi di giustizia costituzionale, tra ricerca di legittimazione e rivisitazione della tradizione. Appunti per una ricerca. In D’ Alessandro, C. A. & Marchese, C. (eds.), Ius Dicere in a Globalized World. Roma.
Pinchbeck, D. Generative AI and the Dark Forest, Daniel Pinchbeck's Newsletter. https://danielpinchbeck.substack.com/p/generative-ai-and-the-dark-forest.
Posner, R. A., How Judges Think. Harvard University Press.
Rumsey, A. (1990). Wording, meaning and linguistic ideology. American anthropologist, 92l.
Sacerdoti Mariani, G. (2024). A Path of Language and Life. The Power of Language and the Boundaries of Power. In Tieghi, G. (ed.), Comparative Law and Global English for Legal Studies. A Law-Linguistic Journey, Jovene.
Sadeghpour, M. & Dangelo, J. (2022). World Englishes and ‘Global Englishes’: Competing or Complementary Paradigms? . Asian Englishes, 24.
Sarcevic, S. (2000). New Approach to Legal Translation. Kluwer Law International.
Scarciglia, R. (2023). Methods and Legal Comparison. Challenges for Methodological Pluralism. Edward Elgar Publishing.
Scarciglia, R. (2024). Methodological Pluralism as a Contemporary Challenge of Legal Comparison. In Tieghi, G. (ed.), Comparative Law and Global English for Legal Studies. A Law-Linguistic Journey. Jovene.
Sciarra, S. (2019). Rule of Law and Mutual Trust: A Short Note on Constitutional Courts as “Institutions of Pluralism”. www.cortecostituzionale.it.
Scollon, R. (2002). Interdiscursivity and identity. In Toolan, M. (ed.), Critical discourse analysis: Critical concepts in linguistics. Routledge.
Sharifian, F. (2013). Globalization and developing metacultural competence in learning English as an international language. Multilingual Education, 3(7).
Shuy, R. W. (2005). Discourse Analysis in the Legal Context. In D Schiffrin, D. et al. (eds.). The Handbook of Discourse Analysis. Blackwell Publishers Ltd.
Siems, M. & Yap, P. J. (2024). (eds.). Comparative Law beyond the State. The Cambridge Handbook of Comparative Law. Cambridge University Press.
Smith, L. (1981). English for cross-cultural communication. St. Martin’s Press.
Smith, L.E. (2014). World Englishes. Key Concepts in Intercultural Dialogue, No. 34.
Solan, L. (1993). The Language of Judges. University of Chicago Press.
Taboada, M. (2016). Sentiment Analysis: An Overview from Linguistics. Annual Review of Linguistics.
Tessuto, G. (2012). Investigating English Legal Genres in Academic and Professional Context. Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
Tessuto, G. (2022). English for Law. A Toolkit for Discourse and genre-based Approaches to ESP Language. Giappichelli.
Thompson, G. & McKinley, J. (2018). Integration of Content and Language Learning. TESOL Encyclopedia of English Language Teaching.
Tieghi, G. (2020). Diritto, esperienze comunicative, Questioning: nuovi itinerari di Giustizia costituzionale?. Federalismi.it, no.14.
Tieghi, G. (2020). Educare, non solo decidere. Nuovi scenari dalle recenti opere dei giudici costituzionali Grossi e Sotomayor. Rivista AIC, no.1.
Tieghi, G. (2021). Cities, Law and Language. Going beyond Through Educational Networks. DPCE Online no.3.
Tieghi, G. (2023i). Corte costituzionale e dovere di sperimentazione comunicativa in udienza. Riflessioni aggiornate sul dialogo con i Giudici. Forum di Quaderni costituzionali, no. 1.
Tieghi, G. (2023). Corte costituzionale italiana, vaccine mandate e comparazione: verso una “comparative mentality”?. Corte Supreme e salute, no. 3 (now also in Liberali B. & Padula, C. (2024). (eds.), Gli obblighi di vaccinazione davanti alla Corte costituzionale. Editoriale Scientifica).
Tieghi, G. (2024). “Looking Beyond our Borders”. A challenging Legal Linguistic Journey Through the New Directions of Comparative Law. In Tieghi, G. (ed.), Comparative Law and Global English for Legal Studies. A Law-Linguistic Journey. Jovene.
Tiersma, P. (1999). Legal Language. University of Chicago Press.
Topchii, O. & Chaiuk, T. (2021). Sociolinguistic, Interpreting and Political Dimensions of English-Language Court Discourse of 21st Century. Humanities Science, vol.3.
Trosborg, A. (1997). Rhetorical Strategies in Legal Language: Discourse Analysis of Statutes and Contracts. Gunter Narr Verlag.
Venter, F. (2017). Rethinking the Language of Constitutional Comparison. South African Journal on Human Rights.
Venter, F. (2022). The Language of Constitutional Comparison. Edward Elgar.
Viganò, F. (2023). La Corte costituzionale e la sua comunicazione. Quaderni costituzionali no.1.
Walker, J. & Levi, A. (1990). (eds.), Language in the Judicial Process. Plenum.
Wehnert, S. et al., (2023). Mining Sentiment and Subjectivity in Swiss Case Law. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, Vol. 1-3594.
Wendel Holmes Jr., O. (1881). The Common Law. Little, Brown & Co.
White, R. (1991). The Middle Ground: Indians, Empires and Republics in the Great Lakes Region. Cambridge University Press.
Wilson, R. J. (2017). The Global Evolution of Clinical Legal Education: More than a Method. Cambridge University Press.
Wu, J. G. (2012). Studies on Interdiscursivity. Sino-US English Teaching, vol. 9, No. 7.
Yuan, Z. et al. (2021). Research on language analysis of English translation system based on fuzzy algorithm. J. Intell. Fuzzy Syst., vol. 40.
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Giovanna Tieghi
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
When submitting a paper the author agrees to the following publishing agreement and processing personal data.
PUBLICATION AGREEMENT, COPYRIGHT LICENSE, PERSONAL DATA PROCESSING CONSENT
This is a publication agreement and copyright license (“Agreement”) regarding a written manuscript currently submitted via Pressto platform
(“Article”) to be published in Comparative Legilinguistics International Journal for Legal Communication (“Journal”).
The parties to this Agreement are:
the Author or Authors of the submitted article (individually, or if more than one author, collectively, “Author”) and Comparative Legilinguistics International Journal for Legal Communication (“Publisher”), address al. Niepodległości 4, 61-874 Poznań, represented by its editor in chief Aleksandra Matulewska.
§1. LICENSE OF COPYRIGHT
a) The Author and the Publisher agree that the Author grants a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which is incorporated herein by reference and is further specified at Creative Commons — Attribution 4.0 International — CC BY 4.0 copyright license in the Article to the general public.
b) The Author grants to the Publisher a royalty-free, worldwide nonexclusive license to publish, reproduce, display, distribute, translate and use the Article in any form, either separately or as part of a collective work, including but not limited to a nonexclusive license to publish the Article in an issue of the Journal, copy and distribute individual reprints of the Article, authorize reproduction of the entire Article in another publication, and authorize reproduction and distribution of the Article or an abstract thereof by means of computerized retrieval systems (such as Westlaw, Lexis and SSRN). The Author retains ownership of all rights under copyright in the Article, and all rights not expressly granted in this Agreement.
c) The Author grants to the Publisher the power to assign, sublicense or otherwise transfer any and all licenses expressly granted to the Publisher under this Agreement.
d) Republication. The Author agrees to require that the Publisher be given credit as the original publisher in any republication of the Article authorized by the Author. If the Publisher authorizes any other party to republish the Article under the terms of paragraphs 1c and 1 of this Agreement, the Publisher shall require such party to ensure that the Author is credited as the Author.
§2. EDITING OF THE ARTICLE
a) The Author agrees that the Publisher may edit the Article as suitable for publication in the Journal. To the extent that the Publisher’s edits amount to copyrightable works of authorship, the Publisher hereby assigns all right, title, and interest in such edits to the Author.
§3. WARRANTIES
a) The Author represents and warrants that to the best of the Author’s knowledge the Article does not defame any person, does not invade the privacy of any person, and does not in any other manner infringe upon the rights of any person. The Author agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the Publisher against all such claims.
b) The Author represents and warrants that the Author has full power and authority to enter into this Agreement and to grant the licenses granted in this Agreement.
c) The Author represents and warrants that the Article furnished to the Publisher has not been published previously. For purposes of this paragraph, making a copy of the Article accessible over the Internet, including, but not limited to, posting the Article to a database accessible over the Internet, does not constitute prior publication so long as the as such copy indicates that the Article is not in final form, such as by designating such copy to be a “draft,” a “working paper,” or “work-in-progress”. The Author agrees to hold harmless the Publisher, its licensees and distributees, from any claim, action, or proceeding alleging facts that constitute a breach of any warranty enumerated in this paragraph.
§4. TERM
a) The agreement was concluded for an unspecified time.
§5. PAYMENT
a) The Author agrees and acknowledges that the Author will receive no payment from the Publisher for use of the Article or the licenses granted in this Agreement.
b) The Publisher agrees and acknowledges that the Publisher will not receive any payment from the Author for publication by the Publisher.
§6. ENTIRE AGREEMENT
a) This Agreement supersedes any and all other agreements, either oral or in writing, between the Author and the Publisher with respect to the subject of this Agreement. This Agreement contains all of the warranties and agreements between the parties with respect to the Article, and each party acknowledges that no representations, inducements, promises, or agreements have been made by or on behalf of any party except those warranties and agreements embodied in this Agreement.
b) In all cases not regulated by this Agreement, legal provisions of Polish Copyright Act and Polish Civil Code shall apply.
c) Any disputes arising from the enforcement of obligations connected with this Agreement shall be resolved by a court competent for the headquarters of the Publisher.
d) Any amendments or additions to the Agreement must be made in writing and signed by authorised representative of both parties, otherwise being ineffective.
e) This Agreement is signed electronically and the submission of the article via the PRESSto platform is considered as the conclusion of the Agreement by the Author and the Publisher.
f) Clause for consent to the processing of personal data - general
g) The Author shall give his or her consent to the processing of their personal data in accordance with the Act of 10 May 2018 on the protection of personal data and Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of persons physical in connection with the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46 / EC (General Data Protection Regulation) for the purpose and in connection with making publications available on the PRESSto scientific journals platform and DeGruyter platform, guaranteeing the security of services rendered, and improving them.
I HAVE READ AND AGREE FULLY WITH THE TERMS OF THIS AGREEMENT.
The Author The Publisher