Article published In: Language and Dialogue
Vol. 11:2 (2021) ► pp.173–199
Text operators as dialogical mechanisms in judgments of the French Court of Cassation
Published online: 14 June 2021
https://doi.org/10.1075/ld.00096.dol
https://doi.org/10.1075/ld.00096.dol
Abstract
The aim of this article is to present text markers as a dialogical mechanism in the French language used in a
legal setting. The dialogue between the court and the public administration takes place primarily through a judgment’s
justification. On the other hand, the dialogue between the authorities and the court takes place in two possible variants: as a
response to the parties allegations raised in the complaint or cassation complaint or as arguments formulated in the cassation
complaint. Analyzing the decisions issued by the French Cour de cassation, one may notice that this material is
characterized by three aspects: intentional, conventional and institutional, as it refers to a set of established beliefs about
the nature of the world of a given community.
Keywords: text markers, dialogue, language, judgment
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Judgment as a genre
- 3.Dialogicality of Court judgments
- 4.Corpus
- 5.Text operators
- 5.1Text operators – content operators
- 5.2Text operators – Truth modal expressions
- 5.3Text operators – Enhancer operators
- 5.4Text operators – Emotional-evaluating and valuing operators
- 5.5Text operators – Mentality operators
- 5.6Text operators – In-text operators
- 6.Conclusions
References Corpus
References (65)
Adam, Jean-Michel. 2013. “Les
consécutives intensives : un schéma syntaxique commun à plusieurs genres de
discours.” Linx 64–651: 115–131.
Aijmer, Karin. 2007. “The
interface between discourse and grammar: The fact is
that.” In Connectives as Discourse
Landmarks, ed. by Agnès Celle, Ruth Huart, 31–46. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
. 2009. “Seem
and evidentiality.” Functions of
Language 16(1): 63–88.
Asher, Nicholas, Farah Benamara and Yvette Yannick, Mathieu. 2009. “Appraisal
of opinion expressions in discourse.” Lingvisticae
Investigationes 32(2): 279–292.
Bakhtin, Mikhail Mikhailovich. 1981. “The Dialogic Imagination: Four essays.” Ed. by Michael Holquist, translated by Caryl Emerson and Michael Holquist. Austin, TX: University of Texas Austin: Texas University Press.
. 1986. “Speech Genres and Other Late Essays.” Ed. by Caryl Emerson and Michael Holquist, translated by Vern W. McGee. Austin, TX: University of Texas Austin: Texas University Press.
Bartmiński, Jerzy, Stanisława Niebrzegowska-Bartmińska. 2009. Tekstologia. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.
Bazerman, Charles. 1994. “Systems
of Genre and the Enactment of Social Intentions.” In Genre and the
new rhetoric, ed. by Aviva Freedman and Peter Medway, 79–101. London: Taylor & Francis.
. 2009. “How
does Science Come to Speak in the Courts? Citations, Intertexts, Expert Witnesses, Consequential Facts and
Reasoning.” Law and Contemporary
Problems, 72:1: 91–120.
Bazerman, Charles and James Paradis. 1991. Textual
Dynamics of the Professions. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
. 2001. “Back
in style : Reworking audience design.” In Style and Sociolinguistic
Variation, ed. by Penelope Eckert and John R. Rickford, 139–169. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Boch, Françoise, Francis Grossmann, and Fanny Rinck. 2007. “Conformément
à nos attentes…’, ou l’étude des marqueurs de convergence/divergence dans l’article de
linguistique.” Revue Française de Linguistique
Appliquée 12(2): 109–122.
Conrad, Susan and Douglas Biber. 2000. “Adverbial
Marking of Stance in Speech and Writing.” In Evaluation in Text:
Authorial Stance and the Construction of Discourse, ed. by Susan Hunston and Geoff Thompson, 56–73. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Dahl, Östen. 2004. “The
Growth and Maintenance of Linguistic Complexity.” Studies in Language Companion
Series, 711, Stockholm University.
Dauter, Bogusław. 2011. Metodyka pracy sędziego sądu administracyjnego [The methodology of
work of an administrative court
judge]. Warszawa: Lexis-Nexis.
Dudley-Evans, Tony and Maggie Jo St John. 1998. Developments
in English for specific purposes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Duszak, Anna. 1998. Tekst, dyskurs, komunikacja międzykulturowa [Text, discourse,
intercultural communication]. Warszawa.
Fakhri, Ahmed. 2009. “Rhetorical
Variation in Arabic Academic Discourse: Humanities versus Law.” Journal of
Pragmatics 411: 306–24.
Halliday, Michael Alexander Kirkwood. 1994/ [2004] (3rd
ed.). An Introduction to Functional
Grammar. London: Edward Arnold.
Halliday, Michael Alexander Kirkwood and Ruqaiya Hasan. 1989. Language,
Context and Text: Aspects of Language in a Social-semiotic Perspective (2nd
ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hyland, Ken. 1998. “Persuasion
and context: The pragmatics of academic metadiscourse.” Journal of
Pragmatics, 301: 437–455.
. 1999. “Disciplinary discourses: Writer stance in research articles.” In Writing: Texts, Processes and Practices, ed. by Christopher N. Candlin, Ken Hyland, 99–121. London: Longman.
Hyland, Ken and Polly Tse. 2004. “Metadiscourse
in Academic Writing: A Reappraisal.” Applied
Linguistics 25(2): 156–177.
Hyon, Sunny. 1996. “Genre
in three traditions: Implications for ESL.” TESOL
Quarterly, 30(4): 693–722.
Jopek-Bosiacka, Anna. 2012. “Retoryka władzy sądowniczej w orzecznictwie Naczelnego Sądu
Administracyjnego.” [The rhetoric of the judiciary in the judicature of the
Supreme Administrative Court] In Między znaczeniem a działaniem.
Retoryka i władza, ed. by Agnieszka Kampka, 81–108. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo SGGW.
Kerbrat-Orecchioni, Catherine. 2009. L’énonciation.
De la subjectivité dans le langage. Paris: Armand Colin.
Lichański, Jakub Zdzisław. 2000. Retoryka od
renesansu do współczesności – tradycja i innowacja [Rhetoric from the Renaissance
to the present day – tradition and
innovation]. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo DiG.
Loi, Chek Kim, Moyra Sweetnam Evans. 2010. “Cultural
differences in the organization of research article introductions from the field of educational psychology: English and
Chinese.” Journal of
Pragmatics 421: 2814–2825.
Maley, Yon. 1985. “Judicial
discourse: the case of legal judgment.” In The Cultivated
Australian, ed. by John E. Clark, 159–175. Hamburg: Buske.
. 1994. “The
Language of the Law.” In Language and The
Law, ed. by John Gibbons, 11–50. London: Longman.
Martin, Jim R. and David Rose. 2003. Working
with Discourse. Meaning beyond the Clause. London, New York: Continuum.
. 2012. Learning
to Write, Reading to Learn: Genre, knowledge and pedagogy in the Sydney
School. Equinox.
Martin, Jim R. and Peter Robert Rupert White. 2005. The
Language of Evaluation: Appraisal in English. Palgrave Macmillan.
Miczka, Ewa. 2002. Kognitywne struktury sytuacyjne i informacyjne w interpretacji dyskursu [Cognitive situational and informational structures in the interpretation of
discourse]. Katowice: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Śląskiego.
Muntigl, Peter and Helmut Gruber. 2005. “Introduction:
Approaches to Genre.” Folia
Linguistica 39(1–2): 1–18.
Mur Dueñas, Pilar. 2011. “An
intercultural analysis of metadiscourse features in research articles written in English and in
Spanish.” Journal of
Pragmatics 431: 3068–3079.
Mushin, Ilana. 2013. “Making
knowledge visible in discourse: Implications for the study of linguistic
evidentiality.” Discourse
Studies 15(5): 627–645.
Nuyts, Jan. 2015. “Subjectivity:
Between discourse and conceptualization.” Journal of
Pragmatics 861: 106–110.
Perelman, Chaim. 1984. Justice,
Law and Argumentation. Essays on Moral and Legal Reasoning. Dodrecht/ Boston/ London: Springer.
Sidnell, Jack. 2012. “Declaratives,
questioning, defeasibility.” Research on Language and Social
Interaction 45 (1): 53–60.
Siepmann, Dirk. 2007. “Les
marqueurs de discours polylexicaux en français scientifique.” Revue française de linguistique
appliquée XII(2): 123–136.
Simon-Vandenbergen, Anne-Marie and Karin Aijmer. 2007. The
Semantic Field of Modal Certainty: A Corpus-based Study of English Adverbs. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Weigand, Edda. 1999. “Rhetoric
and argumentation in a dialogic perspective.” In Rhetoric and
Argumentation, ed. by Eddo Rigotti in collaboration with Sara Cigada, 53–69. Tübingen: Niemeyer.
. 2005. “Conflict
Resolution in Court. Argumentation in Dialogic Interaction.” Special issue of Studies in
Communication Sciences, 193–202.
. 2008. “Towards
a Common European Legal Thinking: A dialogic challenge.” In Paradoxes
of European Legal Integration, ed. by Hanne Petersen, Anne Lise Kjær, Mikael Rask Madsen and Helle Krunke. Aldershot: Ashgate.
. 2009. “Language
as Dialogue.” In Dialogue
Studies vol. 51, ed. by Sebastian Feller. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
. 2010. Dialogue:
The Mixed Game. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
. 2017. “IADA
history: The unity of dialogue and its multiple faces.” Language and
Dialogue 7(1): 63–79.
http://www.courdecassation.fr/IMG/pdf/bull_crim_1210.pdf
