判决书文本中论证框架的分布分析:法学与体育科学的比较分析

L. Lutskovskaia
{"title":"判决书文本中论证框架的分布分析:法学与体育科学的比较分析","authors":"L. Lutskovskaia","doi":"10.14198/jhse.2021.16.proc3.46","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article focuses on comparative analysis of argumentative frames' distribution in the text of appeal court decisions pertaining to different law systems: US court opinions and Russian appellate rulings. Text of court decision is a communicative product of the judicial discourse which is argumentative by virtue of its nature; however, the sequence of frames implementing the argumentative discourse dynamics is specific to each type of court decision generated within respective law system. The present article explores the applicability of frame analysis to judicial argumentation in appeal court decisions pertaining to different law systems. The current interest of the research lays in the fact that court decision texts represent a relatively regular sequence of cognitive argumentation frames that provide for argumentative discourse dynamics, and that can be viewed as a cognitive tool of developing judge’s argumentation strategy. The article aims at conducting an experiment on distribution analysis of the identified argumentation frames in the specified category of court decision texts and compare the traced regularities. The research methodology rests on application of the following methods: distribution analysis method, method of statistical analysis, methods of functional and structural analysis. The materials for the research included 50 texts including court opinions made by United States Court of Appeal for the seventh and ninth circuits and appellate rulings of Altay Regional Court (appeal instance). All documents carried the same type of the decision - affirming the lower court decision - and referred to criminal law only to preclude possible dependence of the research results on type of decision and branch of law concerned. In the research findings we came to the conclusion that within the chosen category of cases argumentation frames’ distribution patterns exhibited insignificant variability however they were not absolutely rigid. The research outcomes can find further application for argumentation structure analysis in other categories of court decisions or other genres of the judicial discourse.","PeriodicalId":402493,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Human Sport and Exercise - 2021 - Winter Conferences of Sports Science","volume":"44 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Distribution analysis of argumentation frames in the text of court decision: Comparative analysis of law and sports science\",\"authors\":\"L. Lutskovskaia\",\"doi\":\"10.14198/jhse.2021.16.proc3.46\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The article focuses on comparative analysis of argumentative frames' distribution in the text of appeal court decisions pertaining to different law systems: US court opinions and Russian appellate rulings. Text of court decision is a communicative product of the judicial discourse which is argumentative by virtue of its nature; however, the sequence of frames implementing the argumentative discourse dynamics is specific to each type of court decision generated within respective law system. The present article explores the applicability of frame analysis to judicial argumentation in appeal court decisions pertaining to different law systems. The current interest of the research lays in the fact that court decision texts represent a relatively regular sequence of cognitive argumentation frames that provide for argumentative discourse dynamics, and that can be viewed as a cognitive tool of developing judge’s argumentation strategy. The article aims at conducting an experiment on distribution analysis of the identified argumentation frames in the specified category of court decision texts and compare the traced regularities. The research methodology rests on application of the following methods: distribution analysis method, method of statistical analysis, methods of functional and structural analysis. The materials for the research included 50 texts including court opinions made by United States Court of Appeal for the seventh and ninth circuits and appellate rulings of Altay Regional Court (appeal instance). All documents carried the same type of the decision - affirming the lower court decision - and referred to criminal law only to preclude possible dependence of the research results on type of decision and branch of law concerned. In the research findings we came to the conclusion that within the chosen category of cases argumentation frames’ distribution patterns exhibited insignificant variability however they were not absolutely rigid. The research outcomes can find further application for argumentation structure analysis in other categories of court decisions or other genres of the judicial discourse.\",\"PeriodicalId\":402493,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Human Sport and Exercise - 2021 - Winter Conferences of Sports Science\",\"volume\":\"44 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Human Sport and Exercise - 2021 - Winter Conferences of Sports Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.14198/jhse.2021.16.proc3.46\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Human Sport and Exercise - 2021 - Winter Conferences of Sports Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14198/jhse.2021.16.proc3.46","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文着重对不同法系上诉法院判决文本中论证框架的分布进行了比较分析:美国法院意见书和俄罗斯上诉法院裁决。判决书文本是司法话语的交际产物,司法话语具有辩论性;然而,实施辩论话语动态的框架序列是特定于各自法律体系中产生的每种法院判决的。本文探讨了框架分析在涉及不同法系的上诉法院判决的司法论证中的适用性。目前的研究兴趣在于,法院判决文本代表了一个相对规则的认知论证框架序列,提供了论证话语的动态,这可以被视为发展法官论证策略的认知工具。本文旨在对法院判决文本特定类别中已识别的论证框架进行分布分析实验,并比较其追踪规律。研究方法主要运用了分布分析法、统计分析法、功能分析法和结构分析法。研究材料包括50份文本,其中包括美国上诉法院第七和第九巡回法院的法院意见和阿勒泰地区法院的上诉裁决(上诉案件)。所有文件都载有同一类型的判决- -肯定下级法院的判决- -并提及刑法只是为了排除研究结果可能依赖于有关的判决类型和法律部门。在研究结果中,我们得出的结论是,在所选择的案例类别中,论证框架的分布模式表现出微不足道的可变性,但它们并非绝对僵化。研究结果可以进一步应用于其他类别的法院判决或其他类型的司法话语的论证结构分析。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Distribution analysis of argumentation frames in the text of court decision: Comparative analysis of law and sports science
The article focuses on comparative analysis of argumentative frames' distribution in the text of appeal court decisions pertaining to different law systems: US court opinions and Russian appellate rulings. Text of court decision is a communicative product of the judicial discourse which is argumentative by virtue of its nature; however, the sequence of frames implementing the argumentative discourse dynamics is specific to each type of court decision generated within respective law system. The present article explores the applicability of frame analysis to judicial argumentation in appeal court decisions pertaining to different law systems. The current interest of the research lays in the fact that court decision texts represent a relatively regular sequence of cognitive argumentation frames that provide for argumentative discourse dynamics, and that can be viewed as a cognitive tool of developing judge’s argumentation strategy. The article aims at conducting an experiment on distribution analysis of the identified argumentation frames in the specified category of court decision texts and compare the traced regularities. The research methodology rests on application of the following methods: distribution analysis method, method of statistical analysis, methods of functional and structural analysis. The materials for the research included 50 texts including court opinions made by United States Court of Appeal for the seventh and ninth circuits and appellate rulings of Altay Regional Court (appeal instance). All documents carried the same type of the decision - affirming the lower court decision - and referred to criminal law only to preclude possible dependence of the research results on type of decision and branch of law concerned. In the research findings we came to the conclusion that within the chosen category of cases argumentation frames’ distribution patterns exhibited insignificant variability however they were not absolutely rigid. The research outcomes can find further application for argumentation structure analysis in other categories of court decisions or other genres of the judicial discourse.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Incidence and prevalence of injuries in futsal: A systematic review of the literature Effects of flipped learning on kinesthetic response and scoring accuracy in football at indoors stadiums for middle school students according to Susan Model Biomechanical analysis of the late approach and the take off in the indoor women’s long jump Kinematic analysis with motion sensors in kayakers: A study with boyacense athletes Distribution analysis of argumentation frames in the text of court decision: Comparative analysis of law and sports science
×
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