Keywords
poststructuralism
methods of textual analysis
genealogy
affordance
narrations in the legal language and the language of law
How to Cite
Abstract
How we function in social reality is determined by various types of cognitive schemas. These concern people, social events and other phenomena. According to the concept offered by various postpositivist currents, including postmodernism, poststructuralism and critical theory, such schemata cannot be objective. The most important element of postmodern considerations is the discovery of the arbitrary nature of modernity. This means rejecting the Enlightenment belief in progress. Innovation, understood as modernity resulting from human reason, is illusory in the postmodern perspective. Innovation consists precisely in a rejection of the myth of the existence of some absolute, objective truths that constitute the social order. The world is textual, made up of many alternative narratives. Definitions, including legal definitions, are socially constructed. They arise from specific social conditions, at a particular stage of development of a particular group. The assumption made by postmodernists is that language, including professional language – such as the language of law or legal language – is neither neutral nor transparent. The innovative power of this language lies in its use of narratives that influence the functioning of social groups of varying degrees of complexity. It is therefore necessary, adopting a postmodern interpretation, to look at the text of legal language in a similar way as we look at other texts. That is, to see in the narrativity of this language structural similarities with other texts that constitute social reality.
References
Adams, Christine. “In the Public Interest: Charitable Association, the State and the Status of utilité publique in Nineteenth-Century France.” Law and History Review 25, no. 2. 2007: 283–321. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0738248000002935
Adamska, Krystyna. “Język jako narzędzie poznania i komunikacji.” Acta Universitatis Lodziensis. Folia Psychologica 17. 2013: 21–37.
Andruszkiewicz, Marta. “Problem jasności w języku prawnym – aspekty lingwistyczne i teoretycznoprawne.” Comparative Legilinguistics 31. 2017: 7–25. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14746/cl.2017.31.1
Antos, Gerd. “Ist der Leie der Dumme? Erosion der Experten-Leie-Dichotomie in der Ära medial inszenierter Betroffenheit.”In: Laien, Wissen, Sprache. Theoretische, methodische und domänenspezifische Perspektiven, edited by Toke Hoffmeister, Markus Hundt, and Saskia Naths. Berlin, and Boston 2021: 25–48. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110731958-002
Ashley, Richard. “The Poverty of Neorealism.” International Organization 38, no. 2. 1984: 225–286. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818300026709
Bieleń, Stanisław. Polityka w stosunkach międzynarodowych. Warszawa, 2010.
Bógdał-Brzezińska, Agnieszka. “Postmodernizm.” n Teorie i podejścia badawcze w nauce o stosunkach międzynarodowych, edited by Ryszard Zięba, Stanisław Bieleń, and Justyna Zając. Warszawa, 2015: 217–239.
Browne, Craig. “Postmodernism, Ideology and Rationality.” Revue Internationale de Philosophie 64, no. 251(1). 2010: 79–99. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3917/rip.251.0079
Buckel, Sonja. “Empire oder Rechtspluralismus? Recht im Globalisierungsdiskurs.” Kritische Justiz 36, no. 2. 2003: 177–191. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5771/0023-4834-2003-2-177
Cieślak, Zbigniew, Irena Lipowicz, Zygmunt Niewiadomski, and Grażyna Szpor. Prawo administracyjne. Warszawa, 2012.
Curtin, Deirdre, and Morten Egeberg. “Tradition and Innovation: Europe’s Accumulated Executive Order.” In Towards a New Executive order in Europe, edited by Deirdre Curtin, and Morten Egeberg. London, and New York, 2015: 5–19.
Cyrul, Wojciech. “Problem ważności w habermasowskiej teorii uniwersalnej pragmatyki.” Ruch Prawniczy, Ekonomiczny i Socjologiczny” 67, no. 2. 2005: 209–221.
Danet, Brenda. “Language in the Legal Process.” Law & Society Review 14, no. 3. 1980: 445–564. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/3053192
della Cananea, Giacinto. “The Genesis and Structure of General Principles of Global Public Law.” In Global Administrative Law and EU Administrative Law. Relationships, Legal Issues and Comparison, edited by Edoardo Chiti, and Bernardo Giorgio Mattarella. Berlin, and Heidelberg, 2011: 92–108. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-20264-3_5
Derrida, Jacques. Of Grammatology. Trans. Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak. Baltimore, 1976.
Devtak, Richard. “Postmodernism.” In Burchill, Scott, Andrew Linklater, Richard Devetak, Jack Donnelly, Matthew Paterson, Christian Reus-Smit, and Jacqui True, Theories of International Relations. Basingstoke, and New York, 2005: 161–187.
Diercks, Uwe. “Die Sprache der Juristen. Die Sprache des Rechts.” Zeitschrift für Rechtspolitik 45, no. 6. 2012: 184–185.
Edkins, Jenny. “Postsructuralism.” In International Relations Theory for the Twenty-First Century. An Introduction, edited by Martin Griffths. London, and New York, 2007: 88–98. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203939031-14
Ehlers, Dirk. “Verwaltung und Verwaltungsrecht im demokratischen und sozialen Rechtsstaat.” In Allgemeines Verwatungsrecht, edited by Dirk Ehlers, and Hermann Pünder. Berlin, and Boston, 2016: 1–53. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110278217.1
Engisch, Karl. Einführung in das juristische Denken. Stuttgart, 1983.
Foucault, Michel. “The Subject and Power.” Critical Inquiry 8, no. 4. 1982: 777–795. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/448181
Funke, Gerhard. “Theorie und Praxis.” In Phenomology on Kant, German Idealism, Hermeneutics and Logic, edited by Olav K. Wiegand, Robert J. Dostal, Lester Embree, Johseph J. Kockelmans, and Jitendra N. Mohanty. Dordrecht, 2000: 249–266. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-9446-2_16
Garstka, Hansjürgen. “Zum Beitrag der Linguistik zur rechtswissenschaftlichen Forschung.” Rechtstheorie, no. 10. 1979: 92–102.
Gibson, James J. The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception. New York, and London, 2015. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315740218
Habermas, Jürgen. “Aspekty racjonalności działania.” In Wokół teorii krytycznej Jürgena Habermasa, edited by Andrzej M. Kaniowski, and Andrzej Szahaj. Warszawa, 1987: 113–157.
Habermas, Jürgen. “The Crisis of the European Union in the Light of Constitutionalization of International Law.” European Journal of International Law 23, no. 2. 2012: 335–348. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ejil/chs019
Habermas, Jürgen. Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns. Handlungsrationalität und gesellschaftliche Rationalisierung. Frankfurt am Main, 1981.
Hadel, Maciej. “Prawo administracyjne jako nauka o sterowaniu w świetle kryzysu prawa administracyjnego i dylematów badawczych – aktualne tendencje w metodologii badań nad prawem administracyjnym”, Przegląd Prawa Publicznego, no. 6. 2017: 65–72.
Hildebrandt, Mireille. “Law as an Affordance: The Devil is the Vanishing Point(s)”, Critical Analysis of Law 4, no. 1. 2017: 116–128.
Hoffmann-Riem, Wolfgang. Innovation und Recht – Recht und Innovation. Recht im Ensemble seiner Kontexte. Tübingen, 2016. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-154478-1
Izdebski, Jan. “Związki nauki prawa administracyjnego z naukami o zarządzaniu.” Roczniki Nauk Prawnych 25, no. 4. 2015: 177–186. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18290/rnp.2015.25.4-9
Jestaedt, Matthias. “Wissenschaft im Recht. Rechtsdogmatik im Wissenschaftsvergleich.” JuristenZeitung 69, no. 1, 2014: 1–12. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1628/002268814X13859861523486
Johnson, Cathryn, Timothy J. Dowd, and Cecilia L. Ridgeway. “Legitimacy as Social Process.” Annual Review of Sociology 32. 2006: 53–78. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.32.061604.123101
Kant, Immanuel. Zum ewigen Frieden; ein philosophischer Entwurf. Leipzig, 1917.
Kessler, Oliver. “On Logic, Intersubjectivity, and Meanings: Is Reality an Assumption We Just Don’t Need?.” Review of International Studies 38, no. 1. 2012: 253–265. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0260210511000672
Kęsicka, Karolina. “Unbestimmte Rechtsbegriffe und Äquivalenzfrage: ein Fall für den Übersetzer.” Studia Germanica Gedanensia, no. 29. 2013: 124–137.
Klebaniuk, Jarosław. “Rola języka w postrzeganiu procesów społecznych.” Nierówności społeczne a wzrost gospodarczy, no. 24. 2012: 268–279.
Kohtamäki, Natalia. “Europejska administracja zintegrowana w służbie wspólnoty.” In Prawo administracyjne w służbie jednostki i wspólnoty, edited by Przemysław Wilczyński et al. Warszawa, 2022: 107–120.
Kohtamäki, Natalia. Prawo hybrydowe w porządku normatywnym unii Europejskiej. Pułtusk, and Warszawa, 2019.
Kohtamäki, Natalia. Theorising the Legitimacy of EU Regulatory Agencies. Berlin, 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3726/b15422
Koszkowski, Maciej. “Legal Analogy as an Alternative to the Deductive Mode of Legal Reasoning.” Adam Mickiewicz University Law Review 6. 2016: 13–25. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14746/ppuam.2016.6.01
Krzyżówek, Anna. Rozum a porządek polityczny. Wokół sporu o demokracje deliberatywną. Kraków, 2010.
Kusiak-Winter, Renata. “Wielopostaciowość administracji w prawie administracyjnym.” Opolskie Studia Administracyjno-Prawne 16, no. 1(3). 2018: 71–81. DOI: https://doi.org/10.25167/osap.1145
License
Copyright (c) 2022 Natalia Kohtamäki
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.