Narrativity of Legal Language in Law-Making Processes

Redakcja — Sun, 15 Mar 2020 21:25:34 +0000

Dr Paweł Skuczyński

University of Warsaw

English abstract: The paper concerns the relation between argumentative and narrative features of legal texts and the question whether legal texts can be perceived as narrative texts. A narrative text is understood as transferring a story to the recipient through a given medium. The story, being the content of a narrative text, constitutes a specific way of manifesting the plot. The latter is a sort of internal logic of the story. The very same plot might be told in many different ways. Hence, the narrative text does not depict events directly, but through a story that requires a storytelling agent – the narrator. Certainly, there are different kinds of narrators, who can be more or less exposed within the text. In consequence, there are at least five positions concerning the relation between argumentation and narration in law: 1) sceptic – narration is a negation of the reasonableness of law; 2) narration is a structure of presentation of facts; 3) narration is a means of rhetoric persuasion; 4) narration is a meta-argumentative structure; 5) narration is a subject of critical analysis as it reveals the identity of an author. The theory of narration is applied to a particular problem of participation of professional self-governments in law-making.

Keywords: legal narrative, legal argumentation, legal language, law-making, professional self-governments

Language: Original printed in Polish, English translation available below

Published: Number 1(22)/2020, pp. 66-83.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.36280/AFPiFS.2020.1.66ENG

Download: Download
Number of downloads: 325

Legal Narrative and Legal Disagreement

Redakcja — Tue, 22 Jan 2019 18:41:11 +0000

Mgr Marta Dubowska, Dr hab. Adam Dyrda

Jagiellonian University in Kraków

Abstract: What is the relationship between general legal theories and legal narratives? In this paper we aim to problematise this relationship in the context of different legal disagreements. As we see it, the Dworkinean category of “theoretical disagreement”, which basically refers to the phenomenon of disagreement “about the grounds of law” (between different general legal theories) is not sufficient to cover all substantial disagreements that appear in legal practice. Thus, we propose a category of “narrative disagreement” which has a wider scope. Eventually, we discuss the thesis of a possible equality of legal theories, as well as legal narratives, which we understand as an inevitable consequence of the relationship between legal theories/narratives and a special type of evidence on which they both rely: truisms about the law that laymen and/or legal professionals generally share.

Keywords: general legal theories, legal disagreement, theoretical disagreement, narrative disagreement, legal narrative, legal truisms

Language: English

Received: 26.12.2017
Accepted: 26.01.2018

Published: Number 2(17)/2018, pp. 47-59.