PRECISION AND VAGUENESS IN THE LANGUAGE OF THE LAW IN HUNGARIAN AND POLISH LEGAL TEXTS

Main Article Content

Karolina KACZMAREK

Abstract

The article discusses two issues connected with the philosophy of law. On the one hand, the law should be formulated in a general way, because it must be applicable in many relevant situations. On the other, it should be precise, because people should be aware exactly of what they can do and what is forbidden to them. In the article the author points out such features of law and language which influence a text to help formulate and interpret it in a particular way that meets both criteria: to be vague and yet enough precise. In the first part, the article points out some kinds of interpretation in law which are especially closely connected with language level. In the second part, the author discusses such features of language which are important when we interpret those texts which are legal, especially the semantic meaning of some vague expressions. In the third part the author points out such language features which may help to make a text more precise, such as definitions, context and other ways of making terms more precise. In the last section the author points out some vague expression grouped grammatically. As the base of her empirical research the author has used Polish and Hungarian legal texts.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

How to Cite
KACZMAREK, K. (2013). PRECISION AND VAGUENESS IN THE LANGUAGE OF THE LAW IN HUNGARIAN AND POLISH LEGAL TEXTS. Comparative Legilinguistics, 13, 51-68. https://doi.org/10.14746/cl.2013.13.04
Section
Articles

References

  1. Vijay K. Bhatia, Jan Engberg, Maurizio Gotti i Dorothee Heller, red. 2005. Vagueness in Normative Texts. Linguistic Insights. Studies in Language and Communication. Vol. 23. Bern: Peter Lang.
  2. Christensen, Ralph i Michael Sokolowski, 2002. Wie normative ist Sprache? Der Richter zwischen Sprechautomat und Sprachgesetzgeber. W Ulrike Haß-Zumkehr, red. Sprache und Recht, ss. 64–79. Berlin/New York: de Gruyter.
  3. Endicott, Timothy, 2005. The Value of Vagueness. [W:] Vijay K. Bhatia, Jan Engberg, Maurizio Gotti i Dorothee Heller, red. Vagueness in Normative Texts. Linguistic Insights. Studies in Language and Communication nr 23, 27–48. Bern: Peter Lang.
  4. Giannoni, Davide, Simone, 2005. ‘Any dispute shall be settled by arbitration’: A Study of Vagueness in International Model Arbitration Clauses. [W:] Vijay K. Bhatia, Jan Engberg, Maurizio Gotti i Dorothee Heller, red. 2005. Vagueness in Normative Texts. Linguistic Insights. Studies in Language and Communication nr 23, 437–468. Bern: Peter Lang.
  5. Grzybek, Joanna, 2009. Polysemy, homonymy and other sources of ambiguity in the language of Chinese contracts. W Comparative Legilinguistics: International Journal for Legal Communication nr 1/2009, 207–215.
  6. Kaczmarek, Karolina, 2011. Lingua legis w aspekcie translatologicznym węgiersko-polskim i polsko-węgierskim. [W:] Legilingwistyka porównawcza nr 6/2011, 9–228.
  7. Kaczmarek, Karolina i Aleksandra Matulewska, 2006. Legal Definitions in English, Hungarian and Polish Statutory Documents. [W:] Investigationes Linguisticae nr XIII, 86–101.
  8. Matulewska, Aleksandra, 2007. Lingua Legis in Translation. Peter Lang Publishing House.
  9. Pinkal, Manfred, 1981. Semantische Vagheit: Phänomene und Theorien, Teil I. Linguistische Berichte 70, 1–26.
  10. Solan, Lawrence, 2005. Vagueness and Ambiguity in Legal Interpretation. [W:] Vijay K. Bhatia, Jan Engberg, Maurizio Gotti i Dorothee Heller, red. Vagueness in Normative Texts. Linguistic Insights. Studies in Language and Communication nr 23, 73–96. Bern: Peter Lang.
  11. Stawecki, Tomasz, i Piotr Winczorek, 2002. Wstęp do prawoznawstwa. Warszawa: Wyd. C. H. Beck.
  12. Tiersma, Peter, M., 2005. Categorical Lists in the Law. [W:] Vijay K. Bhatia, Jan Engberg, Maurizio Gotti i Dorothee Heller, red. Vagueness in Normative Texts. Linguistic Insights. Studies in Language and Communication nr 23, 109–132. Bern: Peter Lang.
  13. Wronkowska, Stanisława i Maciej Zieliński, 1997. Zasady techniki prawodawczej. Komentarz. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Sejmowe.
  14. Zieliński, Maciej, 2002. Wykładnia prawa. Zasady. Reguły. Wskazówki. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Prawnicze LexisNexis.
  15. Wykaz dokumentów prawnych:
  16. évi IV. törvény a Polgári Törvénykönyvről.
  17. KOM (2011) 793, Wniosek, Dyrektywa Parlamentu Europejskiego I Rady w sprawie alternatywnych metod rozstrzygania sporów konsumenckich.
  18. Rozporządzenie Prezesa Rady Ministrów z dnia 2 czerwca 2002 roku w sprawie "Zasad techniki prawodawczej" (Dz. U. Nr 100 poz. 908 z dnia 5 lipca 2002 r.).
  19. Ustawa z dnia 23 kwietnia 1964 r. Kodeks Cywilny.
  20. Wspólny przewodnik praktyczny dotyczący redagowania aktów prawa wspólnotowego. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/pl/techleg/index.htm.