Signalling Sites of Contention in Judicial Discourse. An Exploratory Corpus- Based Analysis of Selected Stance Nouns in US Supreme Court Opinions and Poland’s Constitutional Tribunal Judgments
This paper adopts a comparative, corpus-based perspective to examine the language of judicial justification. Based on substantial corpus data, the study explores one of the linguistics resources, i.e. head nouns (e.g. assumption, belief, notion, etc.) followed by a nominal complement in the form of...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | deu |
| Published: |
Adam Mickiewicz University, Poznan
2017-12-01
|
| Series: | Comparative Legilinguistics |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://pressto.amu.edu.pl/index.php/cl/article/view/12289 |
| _version_ | 1818048758529654784 |
|---|---|
| author | Stanisław GOŹDŹ-ROSZKOWSKI |
| author_facet | Stanisław GOŹDŹ-ROSZKOWSKI |
| author_sort | Stanisław GOŹDŹ-ROSZKOWSKI |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description |
This paper adopts a comparative, corpus-based perspective to examine the language of judicial justification. Based on substantial corpus data, the study explores one of the linguistics resources, i.e. head nouns (e.g. assumption, belief, notion, etc.) followed by a nominal complement in the form of that-clause in two comparable legal settings: the opinions given in the United States Supreme Court and the judgements handed down by Poland’s Constitutional Tribunal. The findings corroborate the results of previous research which shows that nouns found in this pattern are used to perform various discourse functions but evaluation plays a central role in judicial writing and these nouns are used to signal sites of contentions. The study reveals the general similarity between the two sets of data suggesting that American and Polish judicial writing is underpinned by essentially the same epistemological assumptions. Yet, there are some differences in the way the nouns behave phraseologically. Polish nouns tend to show less collocational variation and they are found performing fewer discourse functions.
|
| first_indexed | 2024-12-10T10:26:46Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-89bd49531f794775b20f10ffad6e8394 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2080-5926 2391-4491 |
| language | deu |
| last_indexed | 2024-12-10T10:26:46Z |
| publishDate | 2017-12-01 |
| publisher | Adam Mickiewicz University, Poznan |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Comparative Legilinguistics |
| spelling | doaj.art-89bd49531f794775b20f10ffad6e83942022-12-22T01:52:41ZdeuAdam Mickiewicz University, PoznanComparative Legilinguistics2080-59262391-44912017-12-013210.14746/cl.2017.32.4Signalling Sites of Contention in Judicial Discourse. An Exploratory Corpus- Based Analysis of Selected Stance Nouns in US Supreme Court Opinions and Poland’s Constitutional Tribunal JudgmentsStanisław GOŹDŹ-ROSZKOWSKI This paper adopts a comparative, corpus-based perspective to examine the language of judicial justification. Based on substantial corpus data, the study explores one of the linguistics resources, i.e. head nouns (e.g. assumption, belief, notion, etc.) followed by a nominal complement in the form of that-clause in two comparable legal settings: the opinions given in the United States Supreme Court and the judgements handed down by Poland’s Constitutional Tribunal. The findings corroborate the results of previous research which shows that nouns found in this pattern are used to perform various discourse functions but evaluation plays a central role in judicial writing and these nouns are used to signal sites of contentions. The study reveals the general similarity between the two sets of data suggesting that American and Polish judicial writing is underpinned by essentially the same epistemological assumptions. Yet, there are some differences in the way the nouns behave phraseologically. Polish nouns tend to show less collocational variation and they are found performing fewer discourse functions. https://pressto.amu.edu.pl/index.php/cl/article/view/12289evaluationstancejudicial discourselegal justificationUS Supreme CourtConstitutional Tribunal |
| spellingShingle | Stanisław GOŹDŹ-ROSZKOWSKI Signalling Sites of Contention in Judicial Discourse. An Exploratory Corpus- Based Analysis of Selected Stance Nouns in US Supreme Court Opinions and Poland’s Constitutional Tribunal Judgments Comparative Legilinguistics evaluation stance judicial discourse legal justification US Supreme Court Constitutional Tribunal |
| title | Signalling Sites of Contention in Judicial Discourse. An Exploratory Corpus- Based Analysis of Selected Stance Nouns in US Supreme Court Opinions and Poland’s Constitutional Tribunal Judgments |
| title_full | Signalling Sites of Contention in Judicial Discourse. An Exploratory Corpus- Based Analysis of Selected Stance Nouns in US Supreme Court Opinions and Poland’s Constitutional Tribunal Judgments |
| title_fullStr | Signalling Sites of Contention in Judicial Discourse. An Exploratory Corpus- Based Analysis of Selected Stance Nouns in US Supreme Court Opinions and Poland’s Constitutional Tribunal Judgments |
| title_full_unstemmed | Signalling Sites of Contention in Judicial Discourse. An Exploratory Corpus- Based Analysis of Selected Stance Nouns in US Supreme Court Opinions and Poland’s Constitutional Tribunal Judgments |
| title_short | Signalling Sites of Contention in Judicial Discourse. An Exploratory Corpus- Based Analysis of Selected Stance Nouns in US Supreme Court Opinions and Poland’s Constitutional Tribunal Judgments |
| title_sort | signalling sites of contention in judicial discourse an exploratory corpus based analysis of selected stance nouns in us supreme court opinions and poland s constitutional tribunal judgments |
| topic | evaluation stance judicial discourse legal justification US Supreme Court Constitutional Tribunal |
| url | https://pressto.amu.edu.pl/index.php/cl/article/view/12289 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT stanisławgozdzroszkowski signallingsitesofcontentioninjudicialdiscourseanexploratorycorpusbasedanalysisofselectedstancenounsinussupremecourtopinionsandpolandsconstitutionaltribunaljudgments |