政大機構典藏-National Chengchi University Institutional Repository(NCCUR):Item 140.119/117462
English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 27 |  Items with full text/Total items : 113311/144292 (79%)
Visitors : 50934366      Online Users : 926
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
Scope Tips:
  • please add "double quotation mark" for query phrases to get precise results
  • please goto advance search for comprehansive author search
    •  Adv. Search
    Home ‧ Login ‧ Upload ‧ Help ‧ About ‧ Administer Goto mobile version


    Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/117462


    Title: 法律語言之歧義及模糊性
    Ambiguous Meaning and Vagueness in the Legal Discourse
    Authors: 陳雅齡
    Contributors: 陳惠馨
    陳雅齡
    Keywords: 法律解釋
    歧義性
    模糊性
    文義解釋
    DS 363
    子女最佳利益
    Statutory interpretation
    Ambiguity
    Vagueness
    Textualism
    DS 363 of the WTO
    The best interests of the child
    Date: 2018
    Issue Date: 2018-06-01 17:50:40 (UTC+8)
    Abstract: 本論文中，我經由一件國際法爭端及國內親屬法的條文，探討其所使用字詞包含的語言歧義及模糊性，目的在於豎立一套有利於法學界適用的法律解釋語言學。
    首先，我敘述我的研究目的和方法，第二部分先定義何謂法律的模糊性與歧義性，接著討論並列舉幾種常見的法律文本，下來回顧法律解釋的起源及目的，以及法學家為了解釋法律使用的文義解釋及其他輔助方法，第三部份提出幾種有助於分析語言歧義與模糊性的語言學觀點。第四部分探討WTO架構下2007年美國與中國有關進口進口視聽服務，雙方對於多邊協議中兩個名詞(recording, distribution) 的解釋，第五部分我從語言學觀點分析中國進口視聽服務案件所涉及兩個普通名詞的歧義性，兼談兩方送交爭端小組有關中國境內法規的英文翻譯之模糊性，第五部份蒐集實務判決結果，探討台灣民法親屬篇第1055條之1有關ru04離婚時未成年子女監護權「子女最佳利益 」的解釋，及同條文衡量子女最佳利益考慮因素第七項「不同族群的傳統、文化及價值觀」的措辭問題。
    WTO上訴機構當初如果考慮這種語言學觀點，可能會得到不同的見解。在涉及未成年監護權的家庭案件中，除了藉助於源自西方國家的法律解釋方法，從語言學觀點檢視相關條文的措詞有助對法律條文的理解，努力達到一般法律文本要求的精確原則，也能對修法及擬定條文解釋的指導方針等有所幫助。
    In this thesis, I present two case studies and address the issue of interpreting ambiguous meaning and vagueness in the law. In a globalized society of dramatic transformations, these ambiguous and vague expressions should be brought up and examined closely so as to establish a linguistic framework for statutory interpretation to be applied by jurists tasked with interpreting such ambiguous words and vague phrases.
    This study is organized into five parts. In the first part, I state the research purpose and methods. In the second part, I first define “vagueness” and “ambiguity” in the law, then exemplify the main textual types of the law, which require precision in the wording to prevent difference in legal effects. Next, I investigate the origin and purpose of statutory interpretation, and lastly review how jurists apply textualism and supplementary methods to interpret meaning. In the third part, I present several linguistic theories which can be applicable to determining the meaning of ambiguous or vague terms in a legal context. The fourth part is devoted to the interpretation of the key words “recording” and “distribution” as well as translated business measures submitted by both parties in WTO Dispute Settlement Case 363 regarding the importation of audiovisual materials from the USA to China. In the fifth part, I investigate how the key phrase “the best interests of the child” in Article 1055-1 has been interpreted in recent judgements made by the Kaohsiung Juvenile and Family Court, as well as the extent to which the phrase “traditions, culture, and values of different ethnic groups” has been taken into consideration by the Family Court.
    The WTO Appellate Body might have gained numerous insights had they considered such a linguistic approach. In litigation cases involving child custody rights, re-examination of the wording of a statutory text from the linguistic viewpoint can enhance one’s understanding of its meaning. The results demonstrate that in addition to traditional interpretive canons devised and introduced from the West in the past century, a linguistic approach provides a valuable perspective for interpreting legal language, helps to ensure that the wording of a legal discourse meets the requirement of precision in the law, and can be fruitfully applied when making revisions of statutory texts in the future.
    Reference: Books
    Brinton, L.J. The structure of modern English: a linguistic introduction. Illustrated edition. (John Benjamins Publishing Company, 2000).
    Cao, D., Translation law (Multilingual Matters, 2007).
    Chomsky, N., Knowledge of Language: Its Nature, Origin, and Use (Praeger, 1986).
    Chen, Hweisyin, The Family Law: Theory and Practice 12-22, (Yuan Zao, 2016). 陳惠馨《民法親屬篇:理論與實務》頁12-22 (元照，2016)。
    Gibbons, J. (ed.), Language and Law (Longman, 1994).
    Gardiner, R., Treaty Interpretation (Oxford University Press, 2008).
    Houser, N. & Kloesel, C (Ed), The Essential Peirce: Selected Philosophical Writings, Vol. 1 (1992).
    Hughes, W. and Lavery, J., Critical Thinking: An Introduction to the Basic Skills, 5th Ed. (Broadview Press, 2008).
    Lakeoff, G. Women, Fire and Dangerous Things: What Categories reveal about the human mind (University of Chicago Press, 1987)
    Langacker, R., Foundations of Cognitive Grammar, Vol 2. (Stanford University Press, 1991).
    Larnez, Karnel, Metheodenlehre der Rechtswissenchaft, 6th Ed. (Wunan Publishing, 2000).
    Lefevere, A. (Ed). Translation/History/Culture: A Sourcebook (Routledge, 1992).
    Linderfalk, Ulf., On the Interpretation of Treaties. (Springer Publishing Company, 2007).
    Liu Xinyi, Law Corollary and Interpretation: Law Proceedings (Han lu, 2015) 劉幸義，法律推論與解釋：法學方法論文集，翰蘆，2015年11月。
    Lyons, John (ed.) .New Horizons in Linguistics (Penguin, 1970).
    Lyons, John. Semantics (Vols. 1 and 2) (Cambridge University Press, 1977).
    Lyons, John. Language, Meaning and Context. Suffolk: Fontana (1981).
    Mellinkoff, D. The language of the Law (Brown & Co, 1963).
    Ogden, C.K., and Richards, I.A., Meaning of Meaning (Brace and Company, Inc, 1927).
    Qiu, Pengsheng, Analysis of the Criminal Cases` History of Knowledge, p. 8 (Institute of History and Philology, Academia Sinica Ninth Research Symposium, 2004). 邱澎生, 〈淺析刑案彙覽的知識史〉,中研院歷史語言研究所法律史研究室 2004 年第九次研讀會，頁 8，2004。
    Šarčević, S. New approach to legal translation 238 (Kluwer Law International, 1997).
    Schane, S., Language and the Law (Continuum, 2006).
    Tyler, A. and Evans, V., The semantics of English prepositions: Spatial scenes, cognition and the experiential basis of meaning. (Cambridge University Press, 2003).
    Articles in Books
    Fillmore, Charles J., and B. T. Atkins. Frame semantics, in Linguistics in the Morning Calm, ed. by The Linguistic Society of Korea, 111-137 (Hanshin, 1982).
    Fillmore, Charles J., and B. T. Atkin. Towards a Frame-based organization of the lexicon: the semantics of RISK and its neighbors. In Frames, Fields, and Contrasts: New Essays in Semantics and Lexical Organization, ed. by Adrienne Lehrer and Eva Kittay, 75-102 (Lawrence Erlbaum, 1992).
    Šarčević, S. The Challenges of Legal Lexicography: implications for bilingual and multilingual dictionaries in M SnellHornby (ed.), ZüriLEX `86 Proceedings, edited by M. Snell-Hornby (Francke Verlag, 307-14).
    Journals
    Andersen, P. B. A theory of computer semiotics: semiotic approaches to construction and assessment of computer systems, 3 Cambridge series on human-computer interaction (Cambridge University Press, 1990).
    Brown, R.W., Linguistic determinism and the part of speech, 55 Journal of Abnormal & Social Psychology 1-5 (1957).
    Davis, Elliot M., The newer textualism: Justice Alito`s statutory interpretation, 983-1004 Harvard journal of law & public policy 30(3) (2007).
    Eskridge, William N. Jr. The New Textualism 37 UCLA Law Review 621 (1990).
    Golanski, A., Linguistics and Law. 66 Albany Law Review Journal 60-121. (EBSCO Publishing, 2002).
    Howse, R. The World Trade Organization 20 Years On: Global Governance by Judiciary. Vol 27, No. 1 EJIL 9-77 (2016).
    Liu, Hong-en, The Practice of "Children `s Best Interests Principle" in Custodian Cases of Children after Divorce in Taiwan Courts - From the Perspective of Legal and Social Studies (Military law special issue Vol 57 No. 1, 84-106). 劉宏恩「子女最佳利益原則」在台灣法院離婚後子女監護案件中之實踐—法律與社會研究之觀點, 軍法專刊, 57卷1期，頁84-106 , 2011.年2月。
    Liu, Xinyi, Exploring "Special Regulations" from the Perspective of Semantics and Principles of Criminal Law (The Taiwan Law Review199601, 84-90). 劉幸義，由語意學與刑法原理探討「特別規定」用詞，月旦法學雜誌 84-90,1996年1月。
    Master’s or Doctoral Theses
    Cheng, Yen-ni, An Empirical Study of Paternity Rights of Minor Children after Divorce (Master thesis of National Taiwan University Graduate School of Law, 2015). 鄭諺霓，離婚後未成年子女親權酌定之實證研究，台大法律系研究所碩士論文，2015年6月。
    Hu, Pi-chan. Study of the vagueness of the language of the Criminal Law of the ROC (National Chengchi University Institute of Linguistics, 2009)
    Huang Ming-hsiu. Analysis of the semantics of the provisions of the Civil Code of the late Qing dynasty (National Chengchi University Graduate School of Law 2007).
    Online Resources
    Child Rights International Network https://www.crin.org/en/home/rights/convention
    Law and Regulations Retrieval System 全國法規資料庫 http://law.moj.gov.tw/Index.aspx
    Judicial Information Retrieval System 法學資料檢索系統http://jirs.judicial.gov.tw/Index.htm
    World Trade Organization Offical Website https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases_e/ds363_e.htm
    Description: 碩士
    國立政治大學
    法學院碩士在職專班
    104961006
    Source URI: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G1049610061
    Data Type: thesis
    Appears in Collections:[Master of Laws Program for Executives] Theses

    Files in This Item:

    File SizeFormat
    006101.pdf2666KbAdobe PDF2364View/Open


    All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.


    社群 sharing

    著作權政策宣告 Copyright Announcement
    1.本網站之數位內容為國立政治大學所收錄之機構典藏，無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用，惟仍請適度，合理使用本網站之內容，以尊重著作權人之權益。商業上之利用，則請先取得著作權人之授權。
    The digital content of this website is part of National Chengchi University Institutional Repository. It provides free access to academic research and public education for non-commercial use. Please utilize it in a proper and reasonable manner and respect the rights of copyright owners. For commercial use, please obtain authorization from the copyright owner in advance.

    2.本網站之製作，已盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益，如仍發現本網站之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者，請權利人通知本網站維護人員(nccur@nccu.edu.tw)，維護人員將立即採取移除該數位著作等補救措施。
    NCCU Institutional Repository is made to protect the interests of copyright owners. If you believe that any material on the website infringes copyright, please contact our staff(nccur@nccu.edu.tw). We will remove the work from the repository and investigate your claim.
    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - Feedback