The Language of Judges

Solan, Lawrence M.

doi:10.7208/chicago/9780226767895.001.0001

Cited by 193 publications

(52 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…See further text at nn. 69 The distinction between the ''Non-Warned'' and the ''Warned'' ox is applied to both the homicidal and the bovicidal ox only in Exodus, but whereas each side of the Exodus distinction in the case of the homicidal ox has a precedent in one or other of its Semitic predecessors, there is no precedent at all for the application of the distinction to the bovicidal ox in Exod. 21:36.…”

Section: A Structural Principle Manifested In the Relation Between Rementioning

confidence: 99%

Liability for Animals: An Historico-Structural Comparison

Jackson

2010

Int J Semiot Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This account of civil liability for animals in a range of ancient, mediaeval and modern legal systems (based on a series of studies conducted early in my career: (s.1)) uses semiotic analysis to supplement the insights of conventional legal history, thus balancing diachronic and synchronic approaches. It reinforces the conventional historical sensitivity to anachronism in two respects: (1) (logical) inference of underlying values from concrete rules (rather than attending to literary features of the text) manifests cognitive anachronism, an issue manifest in biblical scholarship’s discussion of the stoning of the homicidal ox in Exod. 21:28 (s.2); (2) similarly, we see from analysis of Exod. 21:35 that the application of modern notions of literal (rather than narrative) meaning not only manifests a semiotic anachronism but here also obscures the institutional origins of many of the rules in a system heavily reliant on self-help and informal settlement (s.3). At the same time, we find in the patterning of remedies exemplification of a basic Saussurean principle: the meaning of a term (here, a rule) is a function of its relationship to other terms in the same semantic system. In this context, there is a structural principle which correlates degrees of remedy with degrees of fault. However, in the history of their literary reception from the ancient sources, we find that particular rules (particularly where liability is based on scienter) take on new meanings in the context of the system into which they are received (s.4). In addition to the goring ox/pauperies/scienter/traditions, the legal systems here studied also offer remedies for depasturation. The relationship between the two sets of remedies is discussed in terms of a Greimassian-inspired analysis of the “narrative typifications of action” which underlie them, and which help to explain (at a factual or narrative, rather than doctrinal level) why some cases appear “easy” while others present themselves as “hard” (s.5). This is distinguishable from the doctrinal formulations of the distinctions between these sets of remedies, which in both the Jewish and Roman sources import an Aristotelian, teleological conception of nature (reflecting contingent social values, themselves analysable, in semiotic terms, as modalities), which only in later times was modified in favour of a more purely descriptive conception. These doctrinal accounts reflect professionalisation not only in their forms of discourse, but also in the institutional structures they presuppose (s.6). I conclude (s.7) with an attempt more precisely to formulate this correlation between the semiotic and institutional development, insisting that professional dogmatic discourse should not be understood simply as reflecting a higher level of cognitive development, but must also take account of the pragmatics of the particular professional discourse

show abstract

Section: A Structural Principle Manifested In the Relation Between Rementioning

confidence: 99%

Liability for Animals: An Historico-Structural Comparison

Jackson

2010

Int J Semiot Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The aim is simultaneously rationalization and legitimation of the court's action (Fisher et al, 1993). Judges need to project the outward appearance of continuity in the law to their peers, the litigants, and society at large (Frank, 1930;Douglas, 1949;Llewellyn, 1960;Fish, 1989;Solan, 1993;Posner, 1990;1995). Moreover, judges typically believe they have a professional duty to abide by precedent, and engage in attempts to convince themselves they are doing so (Tocqueville [1835(Tocqueville [ ] 2000Llewellyn, 1960;Posner, 2001;2005b).…”

Section: The Model Of Legal Rulesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Stare Decisis: Rhetoric and Substance

Fernández

Ponzetto

2008

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Stare decisis allows common law to develop gradually and incrementally. We show how judge-made law can steadily evolve and tend to increase e¢ ciency even in the absence of new information. Judges'opinions must argue that their decisions are consistent with precedent: this is the more costly, the greater the innovation they are introducing. As a result, each judge e¤ects a cautious marginal change in the law. Alternative models in which precedents are either strictly obeyed or totally discarded would instead predict abrupt large swings in legal rules. Thus we …nd that the evolution of case law is grounded not in binary logic …xing judges'constraints, but in costly rhetoric shaping their incentives. We apply this …nding to an assessment of the role of analogical reasoning in shaping the joint development of di¤erent areas of law.

show abstract

“…Sin embargo, la práctica jurídica muestra que solo algunas son admisibles y, de entre estas, otra segunda minoría, elegida, afortunada o especialmente perita, finalmente alcanzará el éxito. No sorprende, pues, que el lenguaje de los jueces (Solan, 1993) sea fuente de atención social, de ejercicio del poder en el más prosaico sentido del término, mucho más del mero ejercicio judicial del que participan.…”

Section: La Mirada Jurídica Hacia El Lenguajeunclassified

Lingüística y derecho

Marcos¹

2004

ELUA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ResumenThis paper is an introduction to the relationships between Law and Linguistics, a new interdisciplinary field of scientific research. This interdisciplinarity is primarily analysed in general terms and, secondly, it is also considered in its singular perspectives: sociological Linguistics, Pragmatics, and Phonetics. Lingüística y derecho, una convergencia anunciada e ineludibleSupongo que cuando los historiadores revisen la lingüística con la que ha concluido el siglo XX podrán acusarla de cualquier cosa menos de rehuir responsabilidades sociales que, tan sólo unas décadas antes, hubieran sido casi impensables. Entre estas, sobre todo durante sus dos últimas décadas, se ha incluido una precavida, aunque firme, atención por el mundo jurídico. Recorriendo ese camino, más o menos a mitad del mismo, los lingüistas han coincidido con quienes desde el extremo opuesto, desde el derecho, compartían idénti-co empeño. En realidad, la mutua aproximación de lo lingüístico y lo jurídico, aun estando inserta en el vasto marco de las aplicaciones lingüísticas finiseculares, no deja de contener algo de antiguo y, a la vez, mucho de rutilante novedad. De antiguo porque descansa en una ligazón subrepticia que vincula ambas disciplinas, se diría que de modo poco menos que consustancial. A la vez, su novedad radica en que todavía hoy constituye un ámbito de exploración profunda, de asentamiento disciplinar pleno y reconocido en la comunidad académica. El que existan bibliografías panorámicas sobre esa interrelación lingüístico-jurídica no restaña la sensación, inquietante y sugerente a la vez, de estar todavía transitando por los andamios de la que está llamada a ser una de las grandes aplicaciones de la lingüística. Son, justamente, bibliografías de esa enjundia uno de los principales argumentos que abonan esa presunción de falta de completa delimitación disciplinar a la que estoy aludiendo. Aunque la decana de ellas ronde el cuarto de siglo (Gémar, 1978), y a pesar de haber tenido sus continuadores' en la década siguiente, en 1990 Danet no le concedía más allá de quince años de antigüedad a los estudios sobre lengua y derecho, o lo que viene a ser lo mismo, excluía una parte considerable de los repertorios anteriores. Ante estos y otros hechos similares, quienes más recientemente han trazado panorámicas generales sobre ese campo interdisciplinar no pueden evitar que se le siga asignando un marchamo de relativa indefinición, de carencia de completo asentamiento científico, unívoco y sin ambages.1

show abstract

The Language of Judges

Cited by 193 publications

References 0 publications

Liability for Animals: An Historico-Structural Comparison

Liability for Animals: An Historico-Structural Comparison

Stare Decisis: Rhetoric and Substance

Lingüística y derecho

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About