Communicating Dissent in Judicial Opinions
A Comparative, Genre-Based Analysis
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 21593335 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Stanisław Goźdź-Roszkowski (0000-0002-4323-8647, University of Lodz, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2020 |
| Volume | 33 |
| Issue | 2 |
| Pages | 381-401 |
| Publication date | 2020-06-01 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue internationale de Sémiotique juridique (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0952-8059 • E-ISSN: 1572-8722 |
| Publisher | Springer Science and Business Media LLC (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1007/s11196-020-09711-y |
| OpenAlex | W3025329585 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 12 |
| References cited | 16 |
To date, there has been surprisingly little research on separate opinions in legal linguistics literature. Scarce attention has been paid to the linguistic and communicative aspects of how judges frame their disagreements. This paper serves as one of the early attempts to examine the institution of votum separatum , or separate opinion, from a comparative, cross-language perspective using a linguistic methodology. The evidence indicates a clear similarity in terms of how separate opinions are integrated within the respective macrostructures of the US SC opinions and the Constitutional Tribunal judgments. This study demonstrates how judges tend to employ highly formulaic expressions to signal their disagreement despite the absence of clear guidelines to communicate such stances. The analysis of their frequent phraseology demonstrates that declaring votum separatum and providing its justification are two different acts, not only legally but also linguistically, especially in terms of their formulaicity. The Polish and American justifications differ in the degree to which the frequent phraseology reveals peculiarities of judicial argumentation in addition to the presence of strong evaluative concerns
Argumentation theory · Dissent · Judicial opinion · Linguistics · Phraseology · Political science · Sociology · Tribunal · Computer Science · Discourse Analysis in Language Studies · Law · Legal Language and Interpretation · linguistics and terminology studies · Philosophy · Psychology
Between silence and dissent
Leaving no room for doubt and exceptions
A comparative investigation of metadiscursive clarifying devices in the abortion discourse of the U.S. Supreme Court
With Due Force
“But I think, with respect, that the trial court was wrong”
Lifting the veil of secrecy – dissenting opinions in the subnational constitutional courts of Germany
Continuum of stance in law
Animated by a Number of Fundamental Principles”
Dissenting with Conviction and Deference
Narratives of Justice and Power
Constitutional Justice as a Language of Rights
A corpus-based examination of reflexive metadiscourse in majority and dissent opinions of the U.S. Supreme Court
| Citations per year | 2.4 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2021 - 2026 (6) |
| Highly cited | No |