文本世界理论和评价理论视域下中文民事判决书的情态研究
发布时间：2018-07-15 20:12
【摘要】：司法判决书是审判的最终书面结果,由首部、事实部分、说理部分、判决结果部分、尾部构成。前人已对判决书的结构、说理和情态等方面进行研究。以往的研究不足在于:(1)对于判决书各部分的情态研究相对较少,它们仅研究判决书情态整体分布;(2)对于情态的分析,从句式及高量值情态词的角度说明法官的权威,未对判决书的其它参与者进行分析,无法揭示判决书的客观性。鉴于此,本研究:(1)运用Gavins的文本世界理论分析情态在判决书各部分的体现,以便呈现判决书中各个参与者的情态使用;(2)为了说明法律文本的公正性和客观性,运用Martin的介入系统来分析各种情态的参与者归属和不同参与者可能使用的介入资源。本研究的数据来源于裁判文书网的一审民事判决书,随机抽样96个文本。本研究结果如下:基于文本世界理论,我们发现在所有判决书中愿望情态世界占26%,义务情态世界占65%,认知情态世界占9%。情态世界的分布在判决书各部分显现有差异:首部无情态世界;事实部分,情态世界分布最多,占49%;说理部分,情态世界所占比例相对较低为38%;判决结果部分,情态世界的比例较低,占8%;尾部,情态世界仅占5%。这种差异是由判决书各部分不同的介入声音造成的:(1)判决书首部介入声音为法院,陈述案件信息,无情态世界构建;(2)事实部分介入声音有五种:原告被告、第三人、法院、法律、合同。原告被告构建愿望情态世界和认知情态世界;法院、法律和合同构建义务情态世界;第三人构建认知情态世界;(3)说理部分和判决结果部分的介入声音均为法院和法律,法院和法律构建义务情态世界,法律还构建认知情态世界;(4)尾部的介入声音为法院,构建义务情态世界和认知情态世界。我们还发现介入声音可以削弱情态世界的主观性。法官声音的介入削弱原告被告构建的愿望情态世界的主观性;法律声音的介入削弱法律条文构建的认知情态世界和义务情态世界的主观性。情态世界的主观性还可以通过介入资源进一步弱化。原告被告使用否认、反驳和背书资源为愿望情态世界提供事实和法律依据;法院使用否认和背书资源削弱法院构建的义务情态的主观性,使其裁决更有说服力;疏远资源削弱第三人构建的认知情态世界的主观性。此外,宣称和反驳资源体现了判决书的公正性,而同意和承认资源体现了判决书的客观性。本研究的理论意义在于呈现了文本世界理论和介入系统理论在解释法律文本的主观性和客观性互动上具有互补性;在实践上,本研究有助于人们从情态表达的角度更加清楚地理解司法判决书。
[Abstract]:The judicial judgment is the final written result of the trial, which consists of the first part, the fact part, the reasoning part, the final part and the tail part. Predecessors have studied the structure, reasoning and modality of the judgment. The shortcomings of the previous studies are: (1) there are relatively few studies on the modality of each part of the judgment, and they only study the overall distribution of the modality of the judgment; (2) the analysis of modality shows the authority of the judge from the perspective of sentence structure and high-valued modal words. The objectivity of the judgment cannot be revealed without the analysis of the other participants in the judgment. In view of this, this study: (1) use Gavins' textual world theory to analyze the embodiment of modality in all parts of the judgment, in order to present the modality usage of each participant in the judgment; (2) to illustrate the impartiality and objectivity of the legal text, Martin's intervention system was used to analyze the ownership of participants and the possible intervention resources used by different participants. The data of this study come from the first instance civil judgment of the adjudicative documents network, random sampling 96 texts. The results are as follows: based on the text world theory, we find that in all judgments, the desire modality world accounts for 26%, the obligation modality world 65%, the cognitive modality world 9%. The distribution of the modal world is different in all parts of the judgment: the first motionless world; the factual part, the world of modality is the most distributed, accounting for 49; the reasoning part, the proportion of the modal world is relatively low to 38; the final part of the judgment, The proportion of modal world is low (8%), and that of tail, modality world is only 5%. This difference is caused by the different interposition sounds of each part of the judgment: (1) the first intervention voice of the judgment is the court, stating the case information, and constructing the world of indolence; (2) there are five kinds of factual partial intervention sounds: the plaintiff defendant, the third person, the court, Law, contract. The plaintiff and defendant build the world of desire and cognition; the court, the law and the contract construct the world of obligation; the third party constructs the world of cognition; (3) the intervening voice of the reasoning part and the judgment result part are both the courts and the law. The court and law construct the world of obligation modality, and law also construct the world of cognition modality; (4) the intervention voice of tail is the court, which constructs the world of obligation modality and the world of cognition modality. We also find that intervention in sound can weaken the subjectivity of the modal world. The intervention of the judge's voice weakens the subjectivity of the desire world constructed by the plaintiff and defendant, and the intervention of the legal voice weakens the subjectivity of the cognitive modality world and the obligation modality world constructed by the legal provisions. Subjectivity in the modal world can be further weakened by intervening in resources. The plaintiff defendant uses the resources of denial, refutation and endorsement to provide the factual and legal basis for the world of desire modality, the court uses the resources of denial and endorsement to weaken the subjectivity of the obligation modality constructed by the court, and makes its ruling more persuasive. Alienating resources weakens the subjectivity of the cognitive world constructed by the third party. In addition, the claim and refutation resources embody the impartiality of the judgment, while the consent and recognition resources embody the objectivity of the judgment. The theoretical significance of this study lies in the fact that the theory of text world and the theory of intervention system are complementary in the interaction of subjectivity and objectivity in the interpretation of legal texts. This study helps people to understand judicial judgment more clearly from the angle of modal expression.
【学位授予单位】：电子科技大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：H146.3
本文编号：2125248
[Abstract]:The judicial judgment is the final written result of the trial, which consists of the first part, the fact part, the reasoning part, the final part and the tail part. Predecessors have studied the structure, reasoning and modality of the judgment. The shortcomings of the previous studies are: (1) there are relatively few studies on the modality of each part of the judgment, and they only study the overall distribution of the modality of the judgment; (2) the analysis of modality shows the authority of the judge from the perspective of sentence structure and high-valued modal words. The objectivity of the judgment cannot be revealed without the analysis of the other participants in the judgment. In view of this, this study: (1) use Gavins' textual world theory to analyze the embodiment of modality in all parts of the judgment, in order to present the modality usage of each participant in the judgment; (2) to illustrate the impartiality and objectivity of the legal text, Martin's intervention system was used to analyze the ownership of participants and the possible intervention resources used by different participants. The data of this study come from the first instance civil judgment of the adjudicative documents network, random sampling 96 texts. The results are as follows: based on the text world theory, we find that in all judgments, the desire modality world accounts for 26%, the obligation modality world 65%, the cognitive modality world 9%. The distribution of the modal world is different in all parts of the judgment: the first motionless world; the factual part, the world of modality is the most distributed, accounting for 49; the reasoning part, the proportion of the modal world is relatively low to 38; the final part of the judgment, The proportion of modal world is low (8%), and that of tail, modality world is only 5%. This difference is caused by the different interposition sounds of each part of the judgment: (1) the first intervention voice of the judgment is the court, stating the case information, and constructing the world of indolence; (2) there are five kinds of factual partial intervention sounds: the plaintiff defendant, the third person, the court, Law, contract. The plaintiff and defendant build the world of desire and cognition; the court, the law and the contract construct the world of obligation; the third party constructs the world of cognition; (3) the intervening voice of the reasoning part and the judgment result part are both the courts and the law. The court and law construct the world of obligation modality, and law also construct the world of cognition modality; (4) the intervention voice of tail is the court, which constructs the world of obligation modality and the world of cognition modality. We also find that intervention in sound can weaken the subjectivity of the modal world. The intervention of the judge's voice weakens the subjectivity of the desire world constructed by the plaintiff and defendant, and the intervention of the legal voice weakens the subjectivity of the cognitive modality world and the obligation modality world constructed by the legal provisions. Subjectivity in the modal world can be further weakened by intervening in resources. The plaintiff defendant uses the resources of denial, refutation and endorsement to provide the factual and legal basis for the world of desire modality, the court uses the resources of denial and endorsement to weaken the subjectivity of the obligation modality constructed by the court, and makes its ruling more persuasive. Alienating resources weakens the subjectivity of the cognitive world constructed by the third party. In addition, the claim and refutation resources embody the impartiality of the judgment, while the consent and recognition resources embody the objectivity of the judgment. The theoretical significance of this study lies in the fact that the theory of text world and the theory of intervention system are complementary in the interaction of subjectivity and objectivity in the interpretation of legal texts. This study helps people to understand judicial judgment more clearly from the angle of modal expression.
【学位授予单位】：电子科技大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：H146.3
【参考文献】
相关期刊论文 前10条
1 林孝文;;我国司法判决书引用宪法规范的实证研究[J];法律科学(西北政法大学学报);2015年04期
2 张法连;张鲁平;;谈语用充实视角下的刑事判决书翻译[J];中国翻译;2014年03期
3 聂玉景;;民事判决书的评价策略——基于对话视角的介入分析[J];西安电子科技大学学报(社会科学版);2013年04期
4 余素青;;判决书叙事修辞的可接受性分析[J];当代修辞学;2013年03期
5 张建文;;从判决书的私人公开看公共记录中的隐私权保护[J];甘肃政法学院学报;2012年05期
6 魏胜强;;当面说理、强化修辞与重点推进——关于提高我国判决书制作水平的思考[J];法律科学(西北政法大学学报);2012年05期
7 孙光宁;;判决书写作中的消极修辞与积极修辞[J];法制与社会发展;2011年03期
8 王松;;民事判决书的制作与执行[J];法律适用;2011年02期
9 徐亚文;伍德志;;法律修辞、语言游戏与判决合法化——对“判决书上网”的法理思考[J];河南省政法管理干部学院学报;2011年01期
10 黄萍;;法律语篇中模糊限制语的人际意义——以中文判决书为例[J];学术交流;2010年02期
相关博士学位论文 前2条
1 姚霖霜;法律文书情绪语言的认知研究[D];华中师范大学;2012年
2 张纯辉;司法判决书可接受性的修辞研究[D];上海外国语大学;2010年
相关硕士学位论文 前1条
1 郑怡;从情态的视角研究中文判决书的说理[D];广东外语外贸大学;2007年
，本文编号：2125248
本文链接：https://www.wllwen.com/wenyilunwen/yuyanyishu/2125248.html
