THE ROLE OF LANGUAGE IN ENSURING LOGICALITY AND RATIONALITY IN LEGAL TEXTS
Main Article Content
Abstract
This article aims to identify principles and strategies for appropriate language use to ensure the logicality, consistency, and comprehensibility of legal texts while adhering to legal rules and requirements. Based on Wittgenstein's theory of logical atomism on the relation between language structure and reality, Searle's theory of speech acts on using language to perform legal acts, and Grice's cooperative principle on conveying implied meanings in communication. The article analyzes how factors such as logical structure, illocutionary force, and conversational implicature affect the logicality, consistency, and comprehensibility of legal texts. From analyzing 10 indictments of different charges, principles are proposed for using rigorous logical structure, selecting appropriate illocutionary forces for legal speech acts, and adhering to the cooperative principle for clear communication. Applying appropriate language use principles and strategies contributes to enhancing the legal system's effectiveness and increasing transparency and fairness in law construction and enforcement.
Keywords
egal language, logicality, legal speech acts, legal texts
Article Details
References
Aristotle. (384-322 BCE). On reasoning. In J. Barnes (Ed.), The complete works of Aristotle: The revised Oxford translation, 1, (pp.13-70). Princeton University Press.
Aristotle. (2004). The art of rhetoric. (H. C. Lawson-Tancred, Trans.). Penguin Classics. (Original work published ca. 4th century BCE)
Atienza, M. (1951). Curso de argumentación jurídica (Course on Legal Argumentation). Trotta.
Baghramian, M. (2023). Language and Legal Reasoning: Finding the Balance.
Baurmann, M. (2022). Linguistic Norms and Flexibility in Legal Argumentation. Routledge
Feteris, E. T. (2017). Fundamentals of legal argumentation: A survey of theories on the justification of judicial decisions (Vol. 1). Springer.
Frege, G. (1879). Begriffsschrift [Concept writing]. Louis Nebert.
Grice, H. P. (1975). Logic and Conversation. In P. Cole & J. L. Morgan (Eds.), Syntax and Semantics, 3, Speech Acts (pp. 41-58). Academic Press.
Hintikka, J. (1929-2015). Loģikas traktāts (A Treatise on Logic). Valters un-Rapa.
Hoang, T. G. (2018). Luan cu trong To tung Tu phap [Argumentation in Judicial Proceedings]. Vietnam National University Press.
Kant, I. (1998). Critique of Pure Reason (P. Guyer & A. W. Wood, Trans.). Cambridge University Press.
Locke, J. (1975). An Essay Concerning Human Understanding (P. H. Nidditch, Trans.). Oxford University Press.
MacCormick, N. (2009). Rhetoric and the Rule of Law: A Theory of Legal Reasoning. Oxford University Press.
Nguyen, D. D. (2015). Ngon ngu Phap li va Nghe thuat dien dat [Legal Language and the Art of Expression]. National Political Publishing House.
Perelman, C. (1984). The New Rhetoric: A Treatise on Argumentation. University of Notre Dame Press.
Postema, G. J. (1949). Ethics and Rhetoric: Introduction. Dialogue, 49(3), 371-395.
Schiffrin, D. (1949). Language and Legal Discourse. Cambridge University Press.
Schiffrin, D. (1949). Language and the Law: Theoretical and Applied Perspectives. The Modern Language Journal, 83(3), 394-396.
Searle, J. R. (1969). Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language. Cambridge University Press.
Sinnott-Armstrong, W. (2021). Think Again: How to Reason and Argue. Penguin Random House.
Tindale, C. W. (2007). Fallacies and argument appraisal. Cambridge University Press.
Tran, N. L. (2012). Luan cu va chung cu trong li luan Phap li [Arguments and Evidence in Legal Reasoning]. National Political Publishing House.
Walton, D. (1942). Informal Logic: A Pragmatic Approach. Cambridge University Press.
Wittgenstein, L. (1922). Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus. Routledge & Kegan Paul.