Law's "Way of Words:" Pragmatics and Textualist Error

Creighton Law Review 49 (2016)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Lawyers and judges cannot adequately address the nature of text, meaning, or interpretation without reference to the insights provided by linguists and philosophers of language. Exploring some of those insights, this article focuses upon what linguists and philosophers of language call “pragmatics.” Pragmatics examines the relations between words and users rather than the relations of words to words (syntax) or the relations of words to the world (semantics). In other words, pragmatics studies how language users actually use and interpret words and other signs in communication. Pragmatics recognizes that speaker meaning can differ from (and even contradict) linguistic meaning, including the literal meaning of text. In its proper context, for example, “Bob is indeed a good lawyer” can ironically mean just the opposite. Pragmatics also recognizes that relevant text is not a thing-in-itself that is simply given. Good lawyers look at such things as purpose and cohesion when determining relevant text. They do not simply take their opponent’s (or even their client’s) assertions of relevance. Pragmatics also provides lawyers with a number of specific concepts and tools which are helpful in determining speaker meaning. For user convenience, this article attempts to set out in one place a number of such concepts and tools. These include: (1) types of cohesion that help determine relevant text, (2) types of context that help determine meaning, (3) pragmatic principles of construction such as principles of relevance and politeness, and (4) important pragmatic notions or devices such as anaphora, cataphora, ellipsis, deixis, presupposition, unstated premises, entailment, and implementives. Finally, as a recurring example (among others) of pragmatics in action, this article examines from multiple perspectives textual issues raised in King v. Burwell, 576 U.S. __ (2015). Keywords: Pragmatics, Semiotics, Interpretation, Textualism, Plain Meaning, King v. Burwell, Affordable Care Act, Text, Meaning, Speaker Meaning, Implicature

Links

PhilArchive

External links

  • This entry has no external links. Add one.
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Context and Pragmatics.Shyam Ranganathan - 2018 - In Piers Rawling & Philip Wilson (eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Translation and Philosophy. Routledge. pp. 195-208.
Pragmatics, Modularity and Mind‐reading.Dan Sperber & Deirdre Wilson - 2002 - Mind and Language 17 (1-2):3–23.
Pragmatics.Kepa Korta & John Perry - 2008 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Literal Meaning.François Récanati - 2002 - New York: Cambridge University Press.
Truth-Conditional Pragmatics.François Recanati - 2010 - Oxford, GB: Oxford University Press.
Semantics and Pragmatics.Christopher Gauker - 2012 - In Gillian Russell & Delia Graff Fara (eds.), Routledge Companion to the Philosophy of Language. Routledge.
Pragmatics.Noel Burton-Roberts (ed.) - 2007 - New York: Palgrave-Macmillan.
The pragmatic circle.Kepa Korta & John Perry - 2008 - Synthese 165 (3):347 - 357.

Analytics

Added to PP
2018-12-23

Downloads
434 (#45,937)

6 months
60 (#79,538)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Harold Anthony Lloyd
Wake Forest University

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Exchange.[author unknown] - 2008 - Ethics, Place and Environment 11 (1):49-90.

Add more references