Grammatical means of textual cohesion in appellate court decisions

• Autores: Zuzana Ďaďová
• Localización: LFE: revista de lenguas para fines específicos, ISSN 1133-1127, Vol. 21, Nº 2, 2015, págs. 8-47
• Idioma: inglés
• Enlaces
  • Texto completo (pdf)
• Resumen

  • The submitted paper deals with analysis of grammatical means of textual cohesion in English in a specific genre of legal register, i.e. in appellate court decisions. The theoretical framework of analysis is the theory of textual cohesion introduced by Halliday and Hasan in their work Cohesion in English (1976), which considers only intersentence cohesive ties to be textually cohesive and which distinguishes four categories of grammatical cohesion: reference, substitution, ellipsis and conjunction. In the analysed texts, all the instances of these four categories of grammatical cohesion are identified and statistically evaluated. The aim of the analysis is twofold. The first goal of research is to find out what kinds of cohesive devices appear with the highest frequency. Another focus of analysis is to find out whether the grammatical means of textual cohesion under analysis contribute to the stylistic qualities of the analysed texts and make them unambiguous and clear enough for interpretation. The findings of the analysis as well as their subsequent comparison with other registers indicate that the most frequent grammatical means of textual cohesion, namely demonstrative reference and additive conjunction, significantly contribute to precision, formality and logical organization of the analysed genre of legal English.DOI: 10.20420/rlfe.2015.0010

• Referencias bibliográficas
  • Bajzíková, E. (1995). Slovenský jazyk. Textová syntax. Bratislava: Stimul.
  • Bhatia, V. K. et al. (2004). Legal discourse. Opportunities and threats for corpus linguistics. In T. Upton et al. (Eds.). Discourse in the...
  • Bolinger, D. (1975). Aspects of language. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
  • Buitkiene, J. (2005). Variability of cohesive devices across registers. Studies about languages, 7, 59-68.
  • Danet, B. Legal discourse. (1985). In T.A. van Dijk (Ed.). Handbook of discourse analysis, Vol. 1, Disciplines of discourse (273 – 389). London:...
  • Engberg, J. & Heller, D. (2008). Vagueness and indeterminacy in law. In K. Vijay et al. (eds.) Legal discourse across cultures and systems...
  • Gutwinski, W. (1976). Cohesion in literary texts. A study of some grammatical and lexical features of English discourse. The Hague: Mouton,...
  • Gibbons, J. (2007). The language and the law. In A. Davies & C. Elder (eds.) The handbook of applied linguistics (258-303). Malden, MASS:...
  • Halliday, M.A.K. & Hasan, R. (1976). Cohesion in English. London : Longman.
  • Hinkel, E. (2001) . Matters of cohesion in L2 academic texts. Applied Language Learning 2, 111-132.
  • Kurzon, D. (1983). Research in text connexity and text coherence: A survey. In H. Buske (ed.) Papiere Zur Textlinguistik, Vol. 2 (369 – 378)
  • Laster, K. (2001). Language and law. In K. Laster Law as culture, 2nd ed. (243 – 267). Annandale, VA: The Federation Press.
  • Leech, G. et al. (2007). Style in fiction. A linguistic introduction to English fictional prose (2nd ed.). London: Longman.
  • Maley, Y. (1987). The language of legislation. Langage in society, 16 (1), 25 – 48.
  • Mellinkoff, D. (1963). Language of the law. Boston: Little, Brown and Co.
  • Scott, M. & Thompson, G. (2001). Patterns of text. In honour of Michael Hoey. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
  • Štekauer, P. (1995). An encyclopaedia of english linguistics. Prešov: Slovacontact.
  • Taboada, M. T. (2004). Building coherence and cohesion. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
  • Tanskannen, S. K. (2006). Collaborating towards coherence. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
  • Tomášek, T. (1998). Překlad v právní praxi. Praha: Linde.
  • Trosborg, A. (2000). Analyzing professional genres. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.