Cover not available

Article published In: Pragmatics and Society: Online-First Articles

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
EPUB logo with download linkDownload EPUB
authorization required

Foreign relations law as an interdiscursive continuum

A comparative genre-pragmatic analysis

ORCiD logo with link | Zhejiang University
ORCiD logo with link | Fujian Agriculture and Forestry University
Published online: 11 November 2025
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/ps.24061.che
Abstract
Foreign relations law, as a genre that aims to build bridges between domestic and international law, is an understudied field in the studies of language use in legal contexts. Drawing on the method of critical genre analysis and the theory of legal speech acts, this comparative genre-pragmatic study between foreign relations laws of the U.S. and China examines foreign relations law as a master speech act and an intertextual and interdiscursive practice. Through analysis of regulative speech acts as well as the intertextual and interdiscursive elements used by drafters, the findings show that the genre of foreign relations law is an interdiscursive continuum with domestic and international legal discourse at two poles, U.S. foreign relations law leans toward the side of international legal discourse while Chinese foreign relations law demonstrates a defensive domestic law orientation, but their position on the continuum is never static but dynamic.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Literature review
    • 2.1A generic view of legal discourse
    • 2.2Speech acts in legal discourse
    • 2.3Intertextuality and interdiscursivity in legal genres
    • 2.4Investigation of legal discourse on foreign relations
  • 3.Data and methodology
    • 3.1Sources of the corpora
    • 3.2Methodology
  • 4.Analysis
    • 4.1Foreign relations law as a master speech act
    • 4.2Foreign relations law as an intertextual and interdiscursive practice
  • International legal discourse
  • Domestic legal discourse
  • 5.Discussion
  • 6.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Note
  • References
References (56)
References
Bhatia, Vijay K. 1993. Analyzing Genre: Language Use in Professional Settings. London: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2004. Worlds of Written Discourse: A Genre-Based View. London: Continuum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2010. “Interdiscursivity in Professional Communication.” Discourse & Communication 21(1): 32–50. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2017. Critical Genre Analysis: Investigating Interdiscursive Performance in Professional Practice. London: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2023. “Legal Genres in Interdiscursive Contexts.” In Research Handbook on Jurilinguistics, ed. by Anne Wagner, and Aleksandra Matulewska, 159–178. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bradley, Curtis. 2019. “What Is Foreign Relations Law?” In The Oxford Handbook of Comparative Foreign Relations Law, ed. by Curtis Bradley, 3–20. New York: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2021. International Law in the U.S. Legal System (3rd Edition). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Butler, Christopher. 2003. Structure and Function: A Guide to Three Major Structural-Functional Theories. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cai, Congyan. 2017. “Chinese Foreign Relations Law.” AJIL Unbound 20171: 336–340. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2019. “International Law in Chinese Courts.” In The Oxford Handbook of Comparative Foreign Relations Law, ed. by Curtis Bradley, 549–564. New York: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Campbell, Neil, and Alasdair Kean. 1997. American Cultural Studies: An Introduction to American Culture. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cao, Deborah. 2009. “Illocutionary acts of Chinese legislative language.” Journal of Pragmatics 41(7): 1329–1340. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cheng, Le, and King Kui Sin. 2008. “A Court Judgment as Dialogue.” In Dialogue and Rhetoric, ed. by Edda Weigand, 267–281. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cheng, Le, and Marcel Danesi. 2019. “Exploring Legal Discourse: A Sociosemiotic (Re)construction.” Social Semiotics 29(3): 279–285. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cleveland, Sarah, and Paul Stephan. 2020. “Introduction: The Role of the Restatements in U.S. Foreign Relations Law.” In The Restatement and Beyond: The Past, Present, and Future of U.S. Foreign Relations Law, ed. by Paul Stephan, and Sarah Cleveland, 1–22. New York: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cope, Kevin, Pierre-Hugues Verdier, and Mila Versteeg. 2021. “The Global Evolution of Foreign Relations Law.” American Journal of International Law 116(1): 1–57. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Coulthard, Malcolm, Alison May, and Rui Sousa-Silva (eds). 2020. The Routledge Handbook of Forensic Linguistics (2nd Edition). London: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
De Tocqueville, Alexis. 1965. Democracy in America. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Deng, Liming, Tania Laghari, and Xiaoping Gao. 2021. “A Genre-Based Exploration of Intertextuality and Interdiscursivity in Advertorial Discourse.” English for Specific Purposes 621: 30–42. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dodge, William. 2017. “Jurisdiction in the Fourth Restatement of Foreign Relations Law.” 18 Yearbook of Private International Law 2016/20171: 143–170. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dong, Xiaobo, and Yafang Zhang. 2023. On the Standardization of Chinese Legislative Language. Singapore: Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fotion, Nicholas. 1971. “Master Speech Acts.” Philosophical Quarterly 21(84): 232–243. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ge, Yunfeng, and Hong Wang. 2019. “Understanding the Discourse of Chinese Civil Trials: The Perspective of Critical Genre Analysis.” Journal of Pragmatics 1521: 1–12. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Global Times. 2023. “The Foreign Relations Law Puts China’s Attitude on the Table: Global Times Editorial.” [URL]
Gong, Mingyu, Winnie Cheng, and Le Cheng. 2020. “Development of Deontic Modality in Chinese Civil Laws: A Corpus Study.” Pragmatics and Society 11(3): 337–362. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Huang, Huikang. 2023. “Milestone of China’s Foreign Relations Legislation: Historical Background, Great Significance, System Integration, Inheritance and Innovation of the Law on Foreign Relations of the People’s Republic of China (中国对外关系立法的里程碑——论中国首部《对外关系法》应运而生的时代背景、重大意义、系统集成和守正创新).” International Law Review of Wuhan University (武大国际法评论) 2023(4): 1–27.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hyon, Sunny. 2018. Introducing Genre and English for Specific Purposes. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Koskela, Merja. 2013. “Same, Same, But Different: Intertextual and Interdiscursive Features of Communication Strategy Texts.” Discourse & Communication 7(4): 389–407. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kristeva, Julia. 1986. “Revolution in Poetic Language.” In The Kristeva Reader, ed. by Toril Moi, 89–136. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Leech, Geoffrey. 1983. Principles of Pragmatics. New York: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Li, Jian, Le Cheng, and Winnie Cheng. 2016. “Deontic Meaning Making in Legislative Discourse.” Semiotica 2091: 323–340. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Maley, Yon. 1987. “The Language of Legislation”. Language in Society 161: 25–48. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1994. “The Language of the Law.” In Language and the Law, ed. by John Gibbons, 11–50. New York: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Martin, James R. 1985. “Process and Text: Two Aspects of Human Semiosis.” In Systemic Perspectives on Discourse, Volume 11, ed. by James D. Benson and William S. Greaves, 248–274. Norwood: Ablex.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Massey, David. 1997. “How the American Law Institute Influences Customary Law: The Reasonableness Requirement of the Restatement of Foreign Relations Law.” Yale Journal of International Law 221: 419–445.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
McLachlan, Campbell. 2019. “Five Conceptions of the Functions of Foreign Relations Law.” In The Oxford Handbook of Comparative Foreign Relations Law, ed. by Curtis Bradley, 21–43. New York: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mey, Jacob. 2017. “Discourse, Interests, and the Law: Some Pragma-Legal Reflections.” International Journal of Legal Discourse 2(1): 13–27. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mezey, Naomi. 2001. “Law as Culture.” Yale Journal of Law and the Humanities 131: 35–67.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ni, Shifeng, and King Kui Sin. 2011. “A Matrix of Legislative Speech Acts for Chinese and British Statutes.” Journal of Pragmatics 43(1): 375–384. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nzelibe, Jide. 2020. “Can the Fourth Restatement of Foreign Relations Law Foster Legal Stability?” In The Restatement and Beyond: The Past, Present, and Future of U.S. Foreign Relations Law, ed. by Paul Stephan, and Sarah Cleveland, 551–564. New York: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ren, Wei, Vijay K. Bhatia, and Zhengrui Han. 2020. “Analyzing Interdiscursivity in Legal Genres: The Case of Chinese Lawyers’ Written Opinions.” Pragmatics and Society 11(4): 615–639. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ross, Lauren. 2012. “Using Foreign Relations Law to Limit Extraterritorial Application of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act.” Duke Law Journal 621: 445–485.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schauer, Frederick. 2023. “The Restatements as Law.” In The American Law Institute: A Centennial History, ed. by Andrew Gold, and Robert Gordon, 425–440. New York: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Searle, John. 1976. “The Classification of Illocutionary Acts.” Language in Society 51: 1–24. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Shaw, Malcolm. 2021. International Law (9th Edition). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tardy, Christine M., and John Swales. 2014. “Genre Analysis.” In Pragmatics of Discourse, ed. by Klaus Schneider, and Anne Barron, 165–187. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tiersma, Peter. 1999. Legal Language. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Todorov, Tzvetan. 2000. “The Origin of Genres.” In Modern Genre Theory, ed. by David Duff, 193–209. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Trosborg, Anna. 1995. “Statutes and Contracts: An Analysis of Legal Speech Acts in the English Language of the Law.” Journal of Pragmatics 231: 31–53. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Widdowson, Henry G. 2004. Text, Context, Pretext: Critical Issues in Discourse Analysis. Oxford: Blackwell. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Xu, Jiajin, and Yunlong Jia. 2011. BFSU Qualitative Coder 1.1. National Research Center for Foreign Language Education, Beijing Foreign Studies University.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue