{"title":"Verena, Klappstein and Maciej Dybowski: theory of legal evidence—Evidence in legal theory","authors":"Yanping Liu, Furui Wang","doi":"10.1515/ijld-2022-2070","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/ijld-2022-2070","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":55934,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Legal Discourse","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2022-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"75575191","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Ina Francesca G. Deuna, Rachelle Ballesteros-Lintao
Abstract In courtroom discourses, evaluative language serves a pivotal role in assessing witnesses for determining the credibility of the testimonies provided and consequently influencing the outcome of the trial. Adopting the appraisal framework, this paper conducted a case study to examine the attitude resources used by court participants in a Philippine drug trial to determine the presence and use of evaluations in courtroom discourse, particularly across trial stages. Results showed that JUDGMENT is the most prevalent valuation in the study with its sub-system Tenacity scoring the highest frequency, followed by APPRECIATION and its sub-category valuation, while AFFECT was uncommon in the trial. The attitude items were also found to be most prevalent in the direct-examination and cross-examination stages to highlight the following: the knowledge of the witnesses on the incident, their involvement in the incident, and the sources of their information. It also showed the adherence of the judge to the principle of neutrality as the decision focused on the legal norms of the facts of the case. The results also attest that ‘legality’ is a distinct feature of the evaluative language in courtroom discourse.
{"title":"The language of evaluation in a Philippine drug trial: an appraisal framework perspective","authors":"Ina Francesca G. Deuna, Rachelle Ballesteros-Lintao","doi":"10.1515/ijld-2022-2068","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/ijld-2022-2068","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In courtroom discourses, evaluative language serves a pivotal role in assessing witnesses for determining the credibility of the testimonies provided and consequently influencing the outcome of the trial. Adopting the appraisal framework, this paper conducted a case study to examine the attitude resources used by court participants in a Philippine drug trial to determine the presence and use of evaluations in courtroom discourse, particularly across trial stages. Results showed that JUDGMENT is the most prevalent valuation in the study with its sub-system Tenacity scoring the highest frequency, followed by APPRECIATION and its sub-category valuation, while AFFECT was uncommon in the trial. The attitude items were also found to be most prevalent in the direct-examination and cross-examination stages to highlight the following: the knowledge of the witnesses on the incident, their involvement in the incident, and the sources of their information. It also showed the adherence of the judge to the principle of neutrality as the decision focused on the legal norms of the facts of the case. The results also attest that ‘legality’ is a distinct feature of the evaluative language in courtroom discourse.","PeriodicalId":55934,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Legal Discourse","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2022-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"76800658","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract Cyberspace, with the rapidly growing network of users and communication technologies, provides venues for myriad social and political interactions. The very technology that enables the development of cyberspace itself also makes detailed and cumulative observation possible. This study aims to investigate cyber discourse in the context of China from the perspective of political and legal integration. Theoretical insight is transformed from viewing cyberspace as a research object to regarding it as a research ontology. To fill in this uncharted domain, this study aims to examine (a) the hidden connotations of the political discourse in cyberspace, (b) the new features of legal regulation in cyberspace, and (c) the relation between political discourse and legal practice. Centering on both political and legal discourse on cyberspace, the findings of this study indicate that there is a dialectical relationship between political discourse and legal practice in cyberspace. With the findings, this study contributes to the discursive construction by extending the discourse studies into cyberspace and integrating the discourse studies with politics and law.
{"title":"Exploring Chinese cyber discourse: integrating political and legal perspectives","authors":"Le Cheng, Xiuli Liu","doi":"10.1515/ijld-2022-2063","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/ijld-2022-2063","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Cyberspace, with the rapidly growing network of users and communication technologies, provides venues for myriad social and political interactions. The very technology that enables the development of cyberspace itself also makes detailed and cumulative observation possible. This study aims to investigate cyber discourse in the context of China from the perspective of political and legal integration. Theoretical insight is transformed from viewing cyberspace as a research object to regarding it as a research ontology. To fill in this uncharted domain, this study aims to examine (a) the hidden connotations of the political discourse in cyberspace, (b) the new features of legal regulation in cyberspace, and (c) the relation between political discourse and legal practice. Centering on both political and legal discourse on cyberspace, the findings of this study indicate that there is a dialectical relationship between political discourse and legal practice in cyberspace. With the findings, this study contributes to the discursive construction by extending the discourse studies into cyberspace and integrating the discourse studies with politics and law.","PeriodicalId":55934,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Legal Discourse","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2022-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"88354143","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract This study examines the commercial law context in which two different law firms representing the same company client engaged in hegemonic discourses to establish control over the provision of legal services for an international Merger and Acquisition (M&A) transaction, which was negotiated across different European jurisdictions in English. The ability to construct and maintain discursive hegemony can help strengthen a dominant position for lawyers in a competitive market for professional services. For this type of professional activity, discursive hegemony relates to power that is achieved through discourse expertise, and the way it was used to prioritize legal advice about a contentious issue and persuade the other discourse participants to accept it. Discourse expertise involves the ability to access and leverage disciplinary knowledge and deploy a range of discursive-communicative strategies to deal with contested orders of interactional discourse. In conjunction with discourse and genre analysis of authentic negotiation documents and emails sourced from one of the participating law firms in Istanbul, the research process involved on-site interviews at the law firm to obtain grounded explanations of the discursive strategies and practices used by lawyers actually involved in the M&A negotiation process. This ethnographic research also revealed how hegemonic features of discourse expertise are operationalized under the law firm’s mentoring system to the point where they become embedded in its disciplinary culture and professional reputation.
{"title":"The use of discourse expertise to control the provision of legal services and establish discursive hegemony in commercial law practice: a case study from Europe","authors":"Anthony Townley","doi":"10.1515/ijld-2022-2062","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/ijld-2022-2062","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This study examines the commercial law context in which two different law firms representing the same company client engaged in hegemonic discourses to establish control over the provision of legal services for an international Merger and Acquisition (M&A) transaction, which was negotiated across different European jurisdictions in English. The ability to construct and maintain discursive hegemony can help strengthen a dominant position for lawyers in a competitive market for professional services. For this type of professional activity, discursive hegemony relates to power that is achieved through discourse expertise, and the way it was used to prioritize legal advice about a contentious issue and persuade the other discourse participants to accept it. Discourse expertise involves the ability to access and leverage disciplinary knowledge and deploy a range of discursive-communicative strategies to deal with contested orders of interactional discourse. In conjunction with discourse and genre analysis of authentic negotiation documents and emails sourced from one of the participating law firms in Istanbul, the research process involved on-site interviews at the law firm to obtain grounded explanations of the discursive strategies and practices used by lawyers actually involved in the M&A negotiation process. This ethnographic research also revealed how hegemonic features of discourse expertise are operationalized under the law firm’s mentoring system to the point where they become embedded in its disciplinary culture and professional reputation.","PeriodicalId":55934,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Legal Discourse","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2022-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"79670305","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Intertemporal treaty interpretation has undergone decades of discussion with few consensuses being reached. In this background, interdisciplinary analysis has come to the stage and injects innovation into treaty interpretation. According to Julian Wyatt’s Intertemporal Linguistics in International Law: Beyond Contemporaneous and Evolutionary Treaty Interpretation, treaty terms can be divided according to semantic features with temporal sense-intention (TSI) examined, based on which one can figure out whether dynamic or static interpretation shall be applied. It offers systematic guidelines and new solutions to intertemporal treaty interpretation, which is conducive to promoting international rule of law.
{"title":"Julian Wyatt (2019): intertemporal linguistics in international law: beyond contemporaneous and evolutionary treaty interpretation","authors":"Xiyao Bian, Jun Zhao","doi":"10.1515/ijld-2021-2061","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/ijld-2021-2061","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Intertemporal treaty interpretation has undergone decades of discussion with few consensuses being reached. In this background, interdisciplinary analysis has come to the stage and injects innovation into treaty interpretation. According to Julian Wyatt’s Intertemporal Linguistics in International Law: Beyond Contemporaneous and Evolutionary Treaty Interpretation, treaty terms can be divided according to semantic features with temporal sense-intention (TSI) examined, based on which one can figure out whether dynamic or static interpretation shall be applied. It offers systematic guidelines and new solutions to intertemporal treaty interpretation, which is conducive to promoting international rule of law.","PeriodicalId":55934,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Legal Discourse","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2021-11-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"83994062","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract Digital technologies have transformed our lives with unimaginable speed and scale, delivering immense opportunities and daunting challenges and leading to the birth of the digital economy. China and the United States (US) are two leading countries in the digital economy in both size and growth rate. This study employs both quantitative and qualitative methods to investigate the similarities and differences between the US and Chinese legislation from a sociosemiotic perspective. By comparing the high frequency words in the two purpose-built corpora, it can be noted that as digital economy, a social sign, has the characteristics of spatiality and temporality. The US federal legislation related to digital economy focuses more on security and protection and has more specific regulations in individual industries, while Chinese legislation is more concerned with the strategy and guideline of development of industries and technologies in digital economy. In the meantime, information infrastructure and information and communication technologies are identified as the foundation and core elements shared in the two countries’ digital economies. Such a corpus-based sociosemiotic exploration of digital economy can shed light on relevant studies in the discourse analysis of legal texts.
{"title":"Exploring digital economy: a sociosemiotic perspective","authors":"Ming Hu, Xitao Hu, Le Cheng","doi":"10.1515/ijld-2021-2053","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/ijld-2021-2053","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Digital technologies have transformed our lives with unimaginable speed and scale, delivering immense opportunities and daunting challenges and leading to the birth of the digital economy. China and the United States (US) are two leading countries in the digital economy in both size and growth rate. This study employs both quantitative and qualitative methods to investigate the similarities and differences between the US and Chinese legislation from a sociosemiotic perspective. By comparing the high frequency words in the two purpose-built corpora, it can be noted that as digital economy, a social sign, has the characteristics of spatiality and temporality. The US federal legislation related to digital economy focuses more on security and protection and has more specific regulations in individual industries, while Chinese legislation is more concerned with the strategy and guideline of development of industries and technologies in digital economy. In the meantime, information infrastructure and information and communication technologies are identified as the foundation and core elements shared in the two countries’ digital economies. Such a corpus-based sociosemiotic exploration of digital economy can shed light on relevant studies in the discourse analysis of legal texts.","PeriodicalId":55934,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Legal Discourse","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2021-11-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"91391640","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract The courtroom, as the most dramatic setting of legal language, is a rich linguistic domain for research; therefore, a science mapping study of the state of the art of this emerging field is of necessity. By CiteSpace V, the present study provides a comprehensive and up-to-date systematic review of the research on courtroom discourse, as presented by 379 article publications and their 10,538 references in the Web of Science (WoS) Core Collection from 1979 to 2021. According to statistics on publications by year, it appears that courtroom discourse research has experienced a period of silence (1979–1992), followed by an emergent period (1993–2005), before entering a period of considerable growth since 2006. Weak cooperative networks, extensive information base, multiple research fronts, and dynamic hotspots of courtroom discourse research have been discovered. Courtroom discourse research focuses on three core topics: courtroom interpreting, the interaction between law, language, power, and ideology, and the investigation of courtroom trial structures. Linguistic communication issues are prominent in courtroom discourse. As far as courtroom subjects are concerned, there is an audience-oriented turn in the latest research front of courtroom discourse. The research hotspots have shifted from language ontology during the emergent period to consolidating and developing the theoretical foundations of courtroom discourse during the rapid development period. According to keyword clustering, stance studies and miscommunication research are significant research hotspots of courtroom discourse.
摘要法庭作为法律语言最具戏剧性的场景，是一个丰富的语言研究领域;因此，对这一新兴领域的现状进行科学的测绘研究是必要的。通过CiteSpace V，本研究对1979年至2021年科学网络(Web of Science, WoS)核心文献集中的379篇论文及其10538篇参考文献进行了全面和最新的法庭话语研究系统综述。从逐年出版物的统计来看，法庭话语研究经历了1979-1992年的沉寂期，1993-2005年的涌现期，2006年以后进入了相当大的增长期。法庭话语研究呈现出合作网络薄弱、信息基础广泛、研究前沿多、热点动态等特点。法庭话语研究主要关注三个核心问题:法庭解释、法律、语言、权力和意识形态之间的相互作用以及法庭审判结构的调查。在法庭语篇中，语言交际问题十分突出。就法庭主体而言，法庭话语的最新研究前沿出现了以受众为导向的转向。研究热点从初创期的语言本体论转向快速发展期的法庭话语理论基础的巩固和发展。根据关键词聚类，立场研究和误解研究是法庭语篇的重要研究热点。
{"title":"A science mapping of studies on courtroom discourse with CiteSpace","authors":"Min Yang, Min Wang","doi":"10.1515/ijld-2021-2057","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/ijld-2021-2057","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The courtroom, as the most dramatic setting of legal language, is a rich linguistic domain for research; therefore, a science mapping study of the state of the art of this emerging field is of necessity. By CiteSpace V, the present study provides a comprehensive and up-to-date systematic review of the research on courtroom discourse, as presented by 379 article publications and their 10,538 references in the Web of Science (WoS) Core Collection from 1979 to 2021. According to statistics on publications by year, it appears that courtroom discourse research has experienced a period of silence (1979–1992), followed by an emergent period (1993–2005), before entering a period of considerable growth since 2006. Weak cooperative networks, extensive information base, multiple research fronts, and dynamic hotspots of courtroom discourse research have been discovered. Courtroom discourse research focuses on three core topics: courtroom interpreting, the interaction between law, language, power, and ideology, and the investigation of courtroom trial structures. Linguistic communication issues are prominent in courtroom discourse. As far as courtroom subjects are concerned, there is an audience-oriented turn in the latest research front of courtroom discourse. The research hotspots have shifted from language ontology during the emergent period to consolidating and developing the theoretical foundations of courtroom discourse during the rapid development period. According to keyword clustering, stance studies and miscommunication research are significant research hotspots of courtroom discourse.","PeriodicalId":55934,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Legal Discourse","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2021-11-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"83559004","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract This study visualizes the international cyberspace sovereignty studies collected in Web of Science Core Collection to construct knowledge bases, development status, and dynamic trends drawing on scientometric method by instrument CiteSpace (5.7.R5). The findings show that the international studies on cyberspace sovereignty have phased and interdisciplinary characteristics. Its research theories, perspectives, and methods will be affected by practical and legal environment in the international contexts. Additionally, this study discusses its rationality to gain the concept through temporal evolution, spatial variation, and linguistic rank; explores its legitimacy through existing necessity, Common Law of Nature spirit and Positive Law foundation; and finally puts forward its implementation path. Furthermore, the logical basis and jurisprudential basis have established the status of cyberspace sovereignty in international law.
摘要本研究利用CiteSpace (5.7.R5)软件对Web of Science核心馆藏的国际网络空间主权研究进行可视化处理，构建知识库、发展现状和动态趋势。研究结果表明，网络空间主权的国际研究具有阶段性和跨学科的特点。其研究理论、视角和方法将受到国际背景下实践环境和法律环境的影响。此外，本文还从时间演化、空间变异和语言等级三个方面探讨了该概念获得的合理性;从存在必要性、普通法自然法精神和实在法基础三个方面探讨其合法性;最后提出了其实施路径。此外，网络空间主权的逻辑基础和法理基础确立了其在国际法中的地位。
{"title":"Visualizing international studies on cyberspace sovereignty: concept, rationality, and legitimacy","authors":"Jianzhong Shi, Ming Xu","doi":"10.1515/ijld-2021-2056","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/ijld-2021-2056","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This study visualizes the international cyberspace sovereignty studies collected in Web of Science Core Collection to construct knowledge bases, development status, and dynamic trends drawing on scientometric method by instrument CiteSpace (5.7.R5). The findings show that the international studies on cyberspace sovereignty have phased and interdisciplinary characteristics. Its research theories, perspectives, and methods will be affected by practical and legal environment in the international contexts. Additionally, this study discusses its rationality to gain the concept through temporal evolution, spatial variation, and linguistic rank; explores its legitimacy through existing necessity, Common Law of Nature spirit and Positive Law foundation; and finally puts forward its implementation path. Furthermore, the logical basis and jurisprudential basis have established the status of cyberspace sovereignty in international law.","PeriodicalId":55934,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Legal Discourse","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2021-11-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"72656202","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract Based on the self-compiled corpora of the European Union and Chinese laws on data governance, this study adopts a corpus-driven approach to comparatively study the legislative design of the EU and China on digital governance, especially on key issues such as data protection, data processing and utilization, and cross-border data transfer. It is found through corpus analysis that the EU has developed a relatively comprehensive data protection system, which internally focuses on the protection of individual data rights and externally sets high standards on the cross-border transfer of data. Despite the data protection paradigm as it manifests, the EU is facing new challenges on data exportation, data jurisdiction in the competitive digital marketplace. Shared the same concern on the data protection legislation, Chinese data law has made significant progress in personal data protection with the nascent enactment of Data Security Law and Personal Data Protection Law. Notably, Chinese legislation features the hierarchal taxonomy of data under the principle of the national security exception, while it requires more legislative skills, flexible response mechanisms, and more subordinate laws to prevent future data security threats. Moreover, the corpus-driven method conducted in this study provides evidential insights for the comparative legal textual studies across jurisdictions.
{"title":"Legislative discourse of digital governance: a corpus-driven comparative study of laws in the European Union and China","authors":"Siyue Li, C. Kit","doi":"10.1515/ijld-2021-2059","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/ijld-2021-2059","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Based on the self-compiled corpora of the European Union and Chinese laws on data governance, this study adopts a corpus-driven approach to comparatively study the legislative design of the EU and China on digital governance, especially on key issues such as data protection, data processing and utilization, and cross-border data transfer. It is found through corpus analysis that the EU has developed a relatively comprehensive data protection system, which internally focuses on the protection of individual data rights and externally sets high standards on the cross-border transfer of data. Despite the data protection paradigm as it manifests, the EU is facing new challenges on data exportation, data jurisdiction in the competitive digital marketplace. Shared the same concern on the data protection legislation, Chinese data law has made significant progress in personal data protection with the nascent enactment of Data Security Law and Personal Data Protection Law. Notably, Chinese legislation features the hierarchal taxonomy of data under the principle of the national security exception, while it requires more legislative skills, flexible response mechanisms, and more subordinate laws to prevent future data security threats. Moreover, the corpus-driven method conducted in this study provides evidential insights for the comparative legal textual studies across jurisdictions.","PeriodicalId":55934,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Legal Discourse","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2021-11-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"76088788","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：