Legal Discourse as a Multi-Dimensional Integrated Phenomenon and Legal Linguistics as a Syncretic Science
https://doi.org/10.21603/2078-8975-2021-23-1-220-228
Abstract
The article introduces legal discourse as part of a complex communicative activity. It is an integrative interdisciplinary phenomenon on the border of jurisprudence and linguistics. The research objective was to establish the constituent parts of legal discourse, which includes legal texts, related scientific literature, and other documents. Legal linguistics is a generalizing discipline that studies the interaction of language and law. The line between legal discourse and other discourses is hard to define. Legal discourse is characterized by unified subjects, procedures, circumstances, and impersonality, that is, the absence of recipient and sender, hence the abundance of impersonal verb forms and impersonal constructions. Legal texts are devoid of national marks, and the vocabulary has equivalents in other languages. The present research was the first to designate a set of texts that make up legal discourse, i.e. texts of laws, decrees, scientific literature on legal matters, various legal documents, judicial texts, texts of interrogations, court speeches, expert opinion, etc. Although legal discourse and legal linguistics have different subjects and tasks, they share the same object, i.e. the interaction of language and law. Legal linguistics is an integrative science based on linguistics and legal theory, which uses achievements of philosophy, psychology, sociology, ethics, cognitive linguistics, pragmalinguistics, linguistic conflictology, etc.
About the Author
A. L. Dedinkin
Vitebsk branch of International Institute for Labor and Social Relations
Belarus
Belarus
Alexander L. Dedinkin
Vitebsk
References
1. Aroutiounova N. D. Human language and world, 2nd ed. Moscow: Iaz. rus. kultury, 1999, 895. (In Russ.)
2. Sapir E. Selected works on linguistics and cultural studies. Moscow: Progress, 1993, 656. (In Russ.)
3. Maslova V. A. Conceptual foundations of modern linguistics. Moscow: Flinta, 2019, 328. (In Russ.)
4. Borbotko V. G. Discourse formation principles. From psycholinguistics to linguasynergetics. Moscow: URSS, 2011, 286. (In Russ.)
5. Plekhanova T. F. Discourse analysis of the text. Minsk: TetraSystems, 2011, 369. (In Russ.)
6. Sidorov E. V. Ontology of discourse, 2nd ed. Moscow: URSS, 2009, 232. (In Russ.)
7. Shlepnev D. N. Legal translation, legal text, legal discourse: on definition. Filologicheskie nauki. Voprosy teorii i praktiki, 2017, (12-2): 174–177. (In Russ.)
8. Arkhipov S. I. Conception of the legal communication. Russian Juridical Journal, 2008, (6): 7–17. (In Russ.)
9. Lavitski A. A. The category of law in the mental representations of Belarusians and Russians: from the word of God to national traditions and legal nihilism. Bi-, poly-, translinguism and language education: Proc. V Intern. Sci.-Prac. Conf. under the auspices of International Association of Teachers of Russian Language and Literature, Moscow, 6–7 Dec 2019. Moscow: RUDN, 2019, 85–92. (In Russ.)
10. Livshits R. Z. Theory of law. Moscow: BEK, 1994, 224. (In Russ.)
11. Gubaeva T. V. Language and law. The art of word control in professional legal practice. Moscow: Norma, 2004, 160. (In Russ.)
12. Aroutiounova N. D. Types of language values. Assessment. Event. Fact. Moscow: Nauka, 1988, 341. (In Russ.)
13. Osadchy M. A. The Russian language at court. Moscow: LENAND, 2020, 256. (In Russ.)
14. Lavitski A. A. The Russian language legal discourse: offences committed verbally. Russian Language Studies, 2019, 17(3): 300–314. (In Russ.) DOI: 10.22363/2618-8163-2019-17-3-300-314
15. Osadchy M. A. The Russian language on the verge of law. Functioning of the modern Russian language in the conditions of legal regulation of speech. Moscow: LIBROKOM, 2016, 256. (In Russ.)
16. Polyakov A. V. Normativity of legal communication. Izvestiia vysshikh uchebnykh zavedenii. Pravovedenie, 2011, (5): 27–45. (In Russ.)
17. Large legal dictionary, ed. Sukharev A. Ia., 3rd ed. Moscow: INFRA-M; 2007, 858. (In Russ.)
18. Golev N. D. Legal aspect of language in linguistic coverage. Legal Linguistics, 1999, (1): 11–58. (In Russ.)
19. Lebedeva N. B. About the metalanguage consciousness of lawyers and the subject of jurisprudence. Legal Linguistics, 2000, (2): 50–64. (In Russ.)
20. Aleksandrov A. S. An introduction to forensic linguistics. Nizhny Novgorod: Nizhegor. pravovaia akad., 2003, 420. (In Russ.)
21. Golev N. D. Legal regulation of speech conflicts and legal linguistic expertise of conflictogenic texts. Legal reform in the Russian Federation: general theoretical and historical aspects, eds. Muziukin V. Ia., Sorokin V. V. Barnaul: АltGU, 2002, 110–123. (In Russ.)
22. Osadchy M. A. Legal self-control of the speaker. Moscow: Alpina Bisnes Buks, 2007, 320. (In Russ.)
23. Brinev K. I. Theoretical linguistics and forensic linguistic expertise. Barnaul: AltGPA, 2009, 252. (In Russ.)
24. Osadchy M. A. Parametrizations of verbal threat in forensic linguistics aspect. Sovremennye problemy nauki i obrazovaniia, 2012, (6). Available at: https://www.science-education.ru/ru/article/view?id=7633 (accessed 23 Jan 2020). (In Russ.)
25. Palashevskaya I. V. Legal discourse: function, structure, and narrative. Volgograd: Paradigma, 2012, 346. (In Russ.)
26. Foucault M. Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. Moscow: Ad Marginem, 2019, 384. (In Russ.)
Review
For citations:
Dedinkin A.L. Legal Discourse as a Multi-Dimensional Integrated Phenomenon and Legal Linguistics as a Syncretic Science. The Bulletin of Kemerovo State University. 2021;23(1):220-228. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.21603/2078-8975-2021-23-1-220-228
Views:
526
Email this article 