Dimensões da justificação no discurso legislativo uma abordagem diacrónica

C. Barros
{"title":"Dimensões da justificação no discurso legislativo uma abordagem diacrónica","authors":"C. Barros","doi":"10.21747/16466195/lingespa11","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"this paper I intend to analyse some aspects of the evolution observable in the way the legislative discourse justifies the legal-legislative provisions in legislative texts of different synchronies of the Portuguese language: this is especially apparent when they present statements which contain acts of discourse with justification value.From a comparative and diachronic perspective, I will confront Afonso X’s medieval legislative texts (such as the Portuguese versions of the Primeyra Partida and the Foro Real) with contemporary Portuguese legislative texts. I will attempt to demonstrate that in medieval legislative texts, in addition to the greater extent of the supporting segments, there is also a discursive structure that uses arguments of authority. In Afonso X’s legislative texts royal legislation is conveyed and the Speaker, designated by the first person “we”, is identified with the king, holding a power inherent to this statute. It reaffirms its status as authority and the desirability of royal legislative action and affirms the pragmatic need for the existence of justice by its favourable effect (which is ethically identified with the Common Good).By contrast, contemporary legislative discourse is presented in the third person and this does not designate any individualized subject. The law is stabilized, established in multi-secular institutions and fundamental rights are already guaranteed, and new legislation is generally conjunctural and especially case-by-case legislation. In contemporary legislative formulations there is no discourse of the legitimization of power and the dimension of the supporting segments is smaller.","PeriodicalId":53272,"journal":{"name":"Linguistica Revista de Estudos Linguisticos da Universidade do Porto","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Linguistica Revista de Estudos Linguisticos da Universidade do Porto","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21747/16466195/lingespa11","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

this paper I intend to analyse some aspects of the evolution observable in the way the legislative discourse justifies the legal-legislative provisions in legislative texts of different synchronies of the Portuguese language: this is especially apparent when they present statements which contain acts of discourse with justification value.From a comparative and diachronic perspective, I will confront Afonso X’s medieval legislative texts (such as the Portuguese versions of the Primeyra Partida and the Foro Real) with contemporary Portuguese legislative texts. I will attempt to demonstrate that in medieval legislative texts, in addition to the greater extent of the supporting segments, there is also a discursive structure that uses arguments of authority. In Afonso X’s legislative texts royal legislation is conveyed and the Speaker, designated by the first person “we”, is identified with the king, holding a power inherent to this statute. It reaffirms its status as authority and the desirability of royal legislative action and affirms the pragmatic need for the existence of justice by its favourable effect (which is ethically identified with the Common Good).By contrast, contemporary legislative discourse is presented in the third person and this does not designate any individualized subject. The law is stabilized, established in multi-secular institutions and fundamental rights are already guaranteed, and new legislation is generally conjunctural and especially case-by-case legislation. In contemporary legislative formulations there is no discourse of the legitimization of power and the dimension of the supporting segments is smaller.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
立法话语中的正当性维度历时性方法
在本文中,我打算分析在葡萄牙语不同同步性的立法文本中立法话语为法律-立法条款辩护的方式中可以观察到的演变的一些方面:当它们提出包含具有辩护价值的话语行为的陈述时,这一点尤为明显。从比较和历时的角度来看,我将面对阿方索十世的中世纪立法文本(如葡萄牙语版本的Primeyra Partida和Foro Real)与当代葡萄牙立法文本。我将试图证明,在中世纪的立法文本中,除了更广泛的支持部分之外,还有一种使用权威论证的话语结构。在阿方索十世的立法文本中,传达了皇家立法,由第一人称“我们”指定的议长被认为是国王,拥有该法规固有的权力。它重申了其权威地位和皇室立法行动的可取性,并通过其有利的效果(在道德上与共同利益相一致)确认了正义存在的实际需要。相比之下,当代立法话语是以第三人称呈现的,这并不指定任何个性化的主体。法律是稳定的,在多宗教机构中确立,基本权利已经得到保障,新的立法一般是结合情况的,特别是逐案立法。在当代的立法表述中,没有权力合法化的话语,支持部分的维度也更小。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
30 weeks
期刊最新文献
Sobre o Imperfeito Narrativo em Português Europeu A pragmática dos dogwhistles algumas questões Breves considerações sobre os nomes coletivos em Português Europeu Visualização da relevância relativa de investigadores a partir da sua produção textual Discursos de celebração e estratégias de apagamento enunciativo Uso e sistema
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1