Main Article Content



The paper is dedicated to highlighting and indicating linguistic exponents used for needs to express the recipients of legal rules, which are present in Polish, Greek and Cypriot normative acts. The thesis of the investigation is the suspicion of designation or denotation or different relations existing between linguistic exponents referring to the recipients of legal rules and the real recipients of legal rules. Before the empirical investigations are conducted, some characteristics of legal language (statutory language) are given. The statutory language is understood as the language used express and to formulate legal rules. Thus, language of legal rules is an abstract creation as it is the interpreted form of the statutory language. Then a typical legal rule might be seen as an utterance saying: “X (in the circumstances Y) does Z”. The statutory language has a specific character and function, which is to express and to verbalize legal rules, thus considering the typology of legal rules, which is division into general legal rules (lex generalis) and specific legal rules (lex specialis), the linguistic exponents of these rules are presented. They are derived from Polish, Greek and Cypriot normative acts, more specifically, they form the laws. The next step of the investigation is to present the linguistic exponents used to specify the recipients of legal rules. The presentation is based on the relations of designation or denotation or different and the analysed linguistic exponents are given in confrontational aspect. The summaries and conclusions of the whole investigation are discussed in the final remarks of the paper. The final step of the investigation is to propose where and how the results of the performed investigations might be used as the applied linguistic, legal translatology especially seems the appropriate applicable field.


Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

How to Cite


  1. Angelidis. 1977 [Αγγελίδης, Γεώργιος, Χρ. 1977. «Δηµοτική» και νοµικά. 29 Μαΐου 1977. Αθήνα].
  2. Archer, Dawn., Peter Grundy. 2011. Introduction. In The pragmatics reader edited by Dawn. Archerand and Peter Grundy. New York, NY: Routledge.
  3. Barak, Aharon 2007. Purposive Interpretation in Law. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
  4. Frantzeskakis, Evrygenis, Symeinidis. 1978. [Φραντζεσκάκης, Φωκίων, Ευρυγένης, Δημήτριος, Συμεωνίδης, Συμεών. 1978. Συγκριτικό δίκαιο. Θεσσαλονίκη: Σάκκουλας].
  5. Galdia, Marcus. 2009. Legal Linguistics. Frankfurt am Mein: Peter Lang.
  6. Gibbons, John. 1999. Language and the law. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics.Volume 19. January 1999: 156-173.
  7. Gizbert-Studnicki, Tomasz., and Mateusz, Klinowski. 2011. Are Legal Concepts Embedded in Legal norms? International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue internationale de Sémiotique juridique December 2012, Volume 25, Issue 4: 553-562.
  8. Gortych-Michalak, Karolina. 2013. Struktura polskich, greckich i cypryjskich aktów normatywnych. Studium porównawcze w aspekcie translatologicznym. Poznań: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Contact.
  9. Grewendorf, Günter., and Monika Rathert. 2009. Language and Law – new applications of formal Linguistics. In: Formal Linguistics and Law. Trends in Linguistics Studies and Monographs 212. Grewendorf Günter and Monika Rathert. 1-22. Berlin - New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
  10. Kelsen, Hans. 2000. Pure doctrine of law. Bucharest: Ed Humanitas.
  11. Kurzon, Dennis. 1989. Language of the law and legal language. In: Special language: From humans thinking to thinking machines, edited by Laurén Christer and Marianne Norman, 283-290. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters ltd.
  12. Malinowski, Andrzej. 2006. Polski język prawny. Wybrane zagadnienia. Warszawa: Lexis Nexis.
  13. Mantovani Dario. 2008. Lingua e diritto. Prospettive di ricerca fra sociolinguistica e pragmatic. In: Il linguaggio giuridico. Prospettive interdisciplinary edited by Giuliana Garzone and Francesca Santulli. 17-56. Milano: Giuffrè.
  14. Mattila, Heikki, E.S. 2006. Comparative legal linguistics. Hampshire: Ashgate Publishing.
  15. Mellinkoff, David. 1963. The Language of the Law. Boston: Little, Brown.
  16. Mey, Jacob Louis. 1993. Pragmatics: An introduction. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishers.
  17. Nowacki, Józef., and Zygmunt Tobor. 1994. Wstęp do prawoznawstwa. Warszawa: PWN.
  18. Panaretou. 2009. [Παναρέτου, Ελένη. 2009. Νοµικός λόγος. Γλώσσα και δοµή των νόµων. Αθήνα: Εκδόσεις Παπάζης].
  19. Sacco, Rodolfo. 1991. Legal Formants: A Dynamic Approach to Comparative Law (Installment I of II). The American Journal of Comparative Law, Vol. 39, No. 1. (Winter, 1991): 1-34.
  20. Sauerland, Uli, Arnim von Stechow. 2001. The syntax-semantics interface. In: International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioural Sciences edited by Neil J. Smelserand Paul B. Baltes,15412–15418. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
  21. Stavrakis. 1995. [Σταυράκης, Αργύριος, Νικ. 1995. Νεοελληνική νοµική γλώσσα. Αθήνα: Νοµική Βιβλιοθήκη].
  22. Vlachopoulos, Srefanos. 2004. Translating untranslable?: The impact of cultural constraints on the translation of legal texts. In: Language and the law edited by John Gibbons, 100-115. New Delhi: Longman Orient.
  23. Vlachopoulos, Stefanos. 2008. Translation into a new LSP: The translation laws in the Republic of Cyprus. Target 20:1.International Journal of Translation Studies: 103-114.
  24. Wróblewski, Bronisław. 1948. Język prawny i prawniczy. Polska Akademia Umiejętności. Prace Komisji Prawniczej nr 3. Kraków.
  25. Zieliński, Maciej. 1998. Wyznaczniki reguł wykładni prawa. Ruch Prawniczy, Ekonomiczny i Socjologiczny. Rok LX, zeszyt 3, 4 1998: 1-20.
  26. Greek Civil Code N.2250/1940, FEK A 151/1946. [Αναγκαστικός Νόμος υπ. αριθ. 2250/1940 «Αστικός Κώδιξ»].
  27. Polish Civil Code, Dz.U. 1964 nr 16 poz. 93. [Ustawa z dnia 23 kwietnia 1964 r. Kodeks cywilny].
  28. Wills and Succession. Chapter 195 of the Laws. Ο περί Διαθηκών και Διαδοχής Νόμος (ΚΕΦ.195) as published in the Cyprus Government Gazette, First Attachment. Legislation – Part I. Number 2410, 13rd of June 2012. 1989