Written judicial discourse: mechanisms of discursive interaction between the author and the reader

Мұқаба

Дәйексөз келтіру

Толық мәтін

Аннотация

In this article, the author examines the written judicial discourse of Great Britain. The subject of the study is the law report – a brief report on the judicial decision, published in open sources and judicial collections. These texts record the most important decisions of the highest courts. A detailed legal analysis and interpretation of the applicable sources of law in a court decision take the form of a compact, concise text, with an accurate and consistent presentation of the court's arguments. The texts of court reports are an example of a modern written legal language, in which the principles and norms of common law are updated again and again. As a unit of discourse, a judicial report is, on the one hand, a complex speech act, on the other hand, it is a text that carries a certain rhetorical (pragmatic) impact on the reader. Using the method of linguistic analysis, the author analyzes the representation of an event during argumentation and identifies various discursive mechanisms of interaction between the author and the reader. The author believes that such characteristics can be divided into retrospective and prospective, depending on their rhetorical impact on the reader. In particular, the author analyzes the functional status and pragmatic significance of such phenomena as indirect speech, subordinate clauses, verbs of epistemic modality. According to the author, the analysis of such characteristics can significantly complement the study of the intertextuality (dialogicity) of written judicial discourse, and accordingly expand our understanding of the formation and influence of the legal context.

Авторлар туралы

Bayrta Arinova

Email: b.arinova@yandex.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-5598-0718

Әдебиет тізімі

  1. Арутюнова Н.Д. Понятие пресуппозиции в лингвистике // Известия АН СССР. 1973. Т. 32. Вып. I. С. 84-89.
  2. Дубровская Судебный дискурс: речевое поведение судьи (на материале русского и английского языков). М.: Изд-во “Академия МНЭПУ”, 2010. С.351.
  3. Пригарина Н.К. Риторическая аргументация. Волгоград: Волгоградское научное изд-во, 2010. С.71.
  4. Albrecht A., Danneberg L. First steps toward an explication of counterfactual imagination // Counterfctual thinking, counterfactual writing / Eds. Birke D., Butter M., & Köppe T. — Walter de Gruyter 2011. P. 12-30
  5. Brian, M. The modern history of law reporting./ University of Melbourne Collections, issue 11,2012. P.32-36. Retreived from https://library.unimelb.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0010/1379026/07_Bryan-LawReport11.pdf
  6. Clark, H., Richard, G. (1990). Quotations as Demonstrations (p. 764–805). Language, vol. 66, no. 4.
  7. Fairclough, N. (2004). Analysing discourse textual analysis for social discourse (p.270). London: Routledge.
  8. Hodges, A. (2015). Intertextuality in discourse. In D.Tannen,H.E. Hamilton, Deborah Schiffrin (Eds.), The handbook of discourse analysis (p.42-61). Second edition. John Wiley & Sons.
  9. Nikitina, T., Spronk, S. (2019). Reported speech forms a dedicated syntactic domain(p. 119-159). Linguistic Typology, vol. 23, no. 1, 2019. doi.org/10.1515/lingty-2019-0005
  10. Sinclair, J. (2004).Trust the text. In M.Coultard (Ed.) Advances in written text analysis(p.12-26). London: Routledge.
  11. Tannen, D. (2007). Talking voices: repetition, dialogue and imagery in conversational (p.234). Cambridge University Press.
  12. https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/persons-right-to-privacy-when-under-criminal-investigation-2p5mhqh88 Law report: Person’s right to privacy when under criminal investigation
  13. https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/times-law-report-lack-of-interim-relief-in-employment-tribunal-for-sex-discrimination-claims-ds90w22bg
  14. https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/rules-for-detaining-asylum-seekers-compliant-with-european-union-law-db9pczjr7
  15. https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/lack-of-common-intention-between-family-prevents-rectification-of-land-registry-form-smh02dn8s
  16. https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/docs/uksc-2020-0122-judgment.pdf
  17. https://www.casemine.com/judgement/uk/610924b92c94e0239c457edc/amp
  18. https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/criminal-law-concepts-do-not-apply-in-family-court-hearings-vqmtqw70g

Қосымша файлдар

Қосымша файлдар
Әрекет
1. JATS XML

Согласие на обработку персональных данных

 

Используя сайт https://journals.rcsi.science, я (далее – «Пользователь» или «Субъект персональных данных») даю согласие на обработку персональных данных на этом сайте (текст Согласия) и на обработку персональных данных с помощью сервиса «Яндекс.Метрика» (текст Согласия).