国外法律语言研究综述(3)

2004年第1期

37

2.6其他研究

　　有两项研究我们不能不提,一是美国匹兹堡大学法学院教授Hibbitts(1994)对美国法律和法律实践的比喻的转变的研究:《理解比喻:视觉性、口头性和美国法律语言的重新配置》。作者发现,美国法律和法律实践的比喻由过去的视觉比喻(唤起视觉意象)占优势的局面明显地转向了由听觉比喻(唤起听觉意象)占优势的局面。作者认为,由于比喻在思维和推理中具有非常重要的作用,因此研究比喻的这种重新配置具有特殊的意义和价值。作者在追溯了历史上重视觉比喻的重要原因之后指出,比喻在法律及法律实践上的结构和配置变化反映了社会的变化、社会结构的变化、社会权力结构及配置的变化、社会价值观的变化。二是G oodrich(1987)的《法律话语》。该书主要论述法律与语言的关系,贯穿全书的一个重要思想是:法律语言是社会和历史起源的重要指示器,是法律文本作为社会调控工具的主要动机。作者是从话语批评的角度来探讨法律与语言的关系的,认为法律语言是权力的语言、是表达支配力和实施支配力的工具,是对意义控制的追求。

3.结语

　　纵观法律语言研究的历程,我们发现它与语言学整体的发展历史是一脉相承的:法律语言特征的静态的研究(句法词汇特征的研究)法律语言作为过程的动态研究(语用研究,

话语分析)法律语言作为工具的研究(社会语言学研究)。研究的趋势是越来越深入,涉及的面越来越广,涉及的学科越来越多。法律离不开语言,从语言角度研究法律是法律研究一个不可或缺的途径;正因为法律离不开语言,所以法律及其活动又给语言学家提供了新的研究领域和丰富的而且有着重要价值的语言资源;由于法律与政治、经济、文化等社会问题密切相关,因此人们从语言角度又可以揭示法律与社会之间的千丝万缕的关系和层面。这些大概是法律语言兴起和兴旺的主要原因,也是法律语言研究者的结论。

以上我们介绍的都是成就,那么存在的问题和不足是:(1)对交叉询问和直接询问的研究多,对法官的语言关注相对较少。(2)对英美法体系的法律语言研究较多,对欧洲大陆法体系研究较少。但是,国外的研究有许多非常值得我们借鉴:(1)重视田野调查;(2)重视真实的现场录音语料;(3)重视语言和法律权利的研究;(4)重视多视角的研究;(5)越来越重视语言学家作为专家证人等问题的应用研究。从作者参加的国内的法律语言研讨会和已发表的文献来看,我们的研究基本上还停留在法律语言的表层层面:句法,用词特征等的研究。语料基本上还是法律文本。另外,中国的法律(学)工作者很少有人从语言角度研究法律和法律实践。但愿本文的介绍能给国内学者一些启发。

参考文献

Atkinson,J.M.and Paul Drew.1979.Order in Court:The Organiz ation of V erbal Interaction in J udicial Settings.London:Macmillan.

Austin,J.L.1962.How to Do Things w ith Words.Oxford:Oxford University Press.

Bennett,W.L.and M.S.Feldoman.1981.Reconst ructing Reality in the Court room.New Brunswick,N.J.: Rutgers University Press.

47当代语言学

Berk2Seligson,S.1990.Bilingual court proceedings:The role of the court interpreter.In J udith N.Levi and Anne

G.Walker,eds.155-202.

Carpenter,R.H.1990.The statistical profile of language behavior with Machiavellian intent or while experimenting caution and avoiding self2incrimination.In Robert W.Rieber and William A.Stewart,eds., L anguage Scientist as Ex pert in L egal Setting.New Y ork:New Y ork Academy of Sciences.

Charrow,R.P.and Charrow,V.1979.Making legal language understandable:A psycholinguistic study of jury instructions.Columbia L aw Review79:1306-74.

Conley,J.M.,and William M.OπBarr.1990.R ules versus Relationships:The Ethnography of L egal Discourse.

Chicago:University of Chicago Press.

.1998.J ust Words.Chicago:University of Chicago Press.

Crystal,David and D.Daly.1969.Investigating English S tyle.Bloomington:Indiana University Press.

ad4de18076a20029bc642d1anguage in the legal process.L aw and Society Review.14:445-564.

Danet,Brenda.1980a.“Baby”or“fetus”?Language and the construction of reality in a manslaughter trial.

Semiotica32:187-219.

Drew,Paul.1985.Analyzing the use of language in courtroom interaction.In T.van Dijk,ed.,Handbook of Discourse A nalysis Vol. 3.Amsterdam:North2Holland.133-48.

1990.Strategies in the contest between lawyer and witness in cross2examination.In J udith N.Levi and Anne G.Walker,eds.39-64.

Eades,Diana.1994.A case of communicative clash:Aboriginal English and the legal system.In J.G ibbons,ed.

234-64.

.2000.I donπt think itπs an answer to the question:Silencing aboriginal witnesses in court.L anguage in Society29:161-95.

Eagleson,Robert.1994.Forensic analysis of personal written texts:A case study.In J.G ibbons,ed.,L anguage and L aw.Harlow:Longman.363-73.

Elwork,A.,B.D.Sales,and J.J.Alfini.1982.M aking J ury Inst ructions U nderstandable.Charlottesville,V.

A.:Michie;Bobbs-Merrill.

.1977.J uridic decisions:In ignorance of the law or in light of it?L aw and Hum an Behavior1:163-90.

G arfinkel,H.1967.S tudies in Ethnomethodology.Englewood Cliffs,N.J.:Prentice Hall.

G oodrich,Peter.1987.L egal Discourse:S tudies in L inguistics,Rhetoric and L egal A nalysis.London:

Macmillan.

Harris,Sandra.1984.Questions as a mode of control in magistratesπcourts.International Journal of the Sociology of L anguage49:5-27.

Hibbitts,Bernard J.1994.Making sense of metaphors:Visuality,aurality,and the reconfiguration of American legal discourse.Candozo L aw Review16:229-356.

Jefferson,G ail.1974.Error correction as an interactional resource.L anguage in Society3,2:181-99. Jones, A.1994.The limitations of voice identification.In J.G ibbons ed.,L anguage and L aw.Harlow: Longman.363-73.

Labov,William and Wendell A.Harris.1994.Addressing social issues through linguistic evidence.In J.G ibbons ed.,L anguage and L aw.Harlow:Longman.265-305.

Lakoff,R.1975.L anguage and Womenπs Place.New Y ork:Harper.

Levi,J udith N.and Anne Graffam Walker.1990.L anguage in the J udicial Process.New Y ork:Plenum Press. Luchjenbroers,J une.1995.Barrister talk vs.witness talk:Whoπs smuggling what?First annual international conference on crime and justice:Email conference.Department of Criminal J ustice at University of Arkansas, Little Rock.

.1997.In your own words:Questions and answers in a Supreme Court trial.Journal of Pragm atics27: 477-503.

2004年第1期

57

Matoesian,Gregory M.1993.Reproducing Rape:Domination through Talk in the Court room.Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

ad4de18076a20029bc642d1anguage,law,and society:Policy implications of the K ennedy Smith rape trial.L aw and Society Review29:669-701.

Maynard,D.W.1985.The problem of justice in the courts approached by the analysis of plea bargaining discourse.

In T.van Dijk,ed.,Handbook of Discourse A nalysis Vol. 4.Amsterdam:North2Holland.153-79. Mellinkoff,David.1963.The L anguage of the L aw.Boston:Little,Brown and Company.

Merry,Sally Engle.1990.Getting J ustice and Getting Even:L egal Consciousness A mong Working2Class

A mericans.Chicago:University of Chicago Press.

Mulligan,William G.1987.Ex pert W itnesses:Direct and Cross2Ex amination.New Y ork:John Wiley&S ons. Nolan,F.1994.Auditory and acoustic analysis in speaker recognition.In J.G ibbons ed.,L anguage and L aw.

Harlow:Longman.326-45.

OπBarr,Wiliam.1982.L inguistic Evidence:L anguage,Power and S t rategy in the Court room.New Y ork: Academic Press.

Philips,S.U.1982.The language socialization of lawyers:Acquiring the cant.In G.S pindler,ed.,Doing the Ethnography of Schooling.New Y ork:Holt,Rinehart and Winston.176-209.

.1984.The socialization of questions and answers in courtroom discourse:A study of changes of plea in an Arizona court.Text4,1-3:225-48.

.1985.Written and spoken law in the American courtroom:The taking of guilty pleas.In S.U.Philips, Ideological Diversity in Court room Discourse:Due Process J udicial Discretion in the Guilty Plea.Norwood, N.J.:Ablex.

Pomerantz,Anita.1978.Attributions of responsibility:Blamings.Sociology12:115-21.

Rieber,Robert W.and William A.Stewart.1990.The L anguage Scientist as Ex pert in the L egal Setting:Issues in Forensic L inguistics.New Y ork:The New Y ork Academy of Sciences.

Shuy,Roger W.1987.The L anguage of Conf ession,Interrogation and Deception.Thousand Oaks CA:Sage. S olan,Lawrence M.1993.The L anguage of J udges.Chicago:University of Chicago Press.

Stygall,G ail.1994.T rial L anguage:Dif f erential Discourse Processing and Discursive Form ation.Philadelphia, PA:John Benjamins

Tiersma,Peter M.1999.L egal L anguage.Chicago:University of Chicago Press.

Walker,Anne,1987.Linguistic manipulation,power and legal setting.In L.K edar,ed.,Power Through Discourse.Norwood,NJ:Ablex.57-80.

Walsh,Michael.1994.Interactional Styles in the courtroom.In J.G ibbons ed.,L anguage and L aw.Harlow: Longman.217-33.

Wodak2Engel,R.1984.Determination of guilt:Discourse in the courtroom.In Cheris Kramarae,Muriel Schultz, and William OπBarr,eds.,L anguage and Power.Beverly Hills:Sage.

Woodbury,Hanni.1984.The strategic use of questions in court.Semiotica48,3-4:197-228.

.1985.The interaction between judge and defendant.In T.van Dijk,ed.,Handbook of Discourse

A nalysis Vol.4.Amsterdam:North2Holland.181-91.

廖美珍,未刊,《法庭问答及其互动研究———语言学视角》。

作者通讯地址:　430079　湖北武汉华中师范大学外国语学院外国语言学和应用语言学研究所

E2mail:fan81@ad4de18076a20029bc642d1a

67当代语言学

Dong,Xiufang,Further grammaticalization of“shi”:From f unctional w ord to w ord2internal element

In modern Mandarin,there are some conjunctives and adverbs containing“shi”(是)in their composition.This kind of“shi”is derived from copula or focus marker.“Shi”,originally a verb,through initial grammaticalization,became a functional word.It went through further grammaticalization,and reduced to a word2internal element.The grammaticalization process is still going on,and as a result,it gives birth to many newly emergent conjunctives and adverbs.

Liu,Lili,Chinese tone theory research in the20century

This paper presents a critical review of theoretical research on Chinese tone carried out in the 20century.Four major themes emerge prominently from the literature.Firstly,tone was held as a relative pitch.Secondly,pitch was debated over its status as a phoneme or non2phoneme. Thirdly,tone was studied in terms of auto2segmental phonology.Fourthly,tone was examined in the framework of the Optimality Theory.

搜索“diyifanwen.net”或“第一范文网”即可找到本站免费阅读全部范文。收藏本站方便下次阅读，第一范文网，提供最新医药卫生国外法律语言研究综述(3)全文阅读和word下载服务。