Linguam novit curia? Corpus analysis in criminal law – the beginning of a discussion
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.31261/FPK.2021.01.04Keywords:
corpus linguistics, corpus analysis, statutory interpretation, criminal law, ordinary meaningAbstract
In the interpretation of criminal law, an important role is played by the presumption of the common (general, colloquial) meaning of statutory expressions. Determining the common meaning in the process of applying the law is usually based on the linguistic intuition of the procedural authority or on dictionaries. In the article, we present an alternative source
of knowledge about the common meaning of linguistic corpora. The use of corpora as a tool of legal interpretation has been intensively discussed in American literature for several years. The main objections are raised in the context of criminal law. The article reviews the main arguments raised in the American debate and relates them to Polish legal culture. Moreover, some exemplary corpus analyzes in criminal cases are presented, both in the context of legal interpretation and the assessment of linguistic elements of the facts of the case.
References
Bielska-Brodziak A., Interpretacja tekstu prawnego na podstawie orzecznictwa podatkowego, Wolters Kluwer, Warszawa 2009.
Bielska-Brodziak A., Tkacz S., Tobor Z., Kilka uwag o wykładni prawa karnego, „Studia Prawnicze” 2009, nr 3, s. 109–144.
Bielska-Brodziak A., Tobor Z., Słowniki a interpretacja tekstów prawnych, „Państwo i Prawo” 2007, nr 5, s. 20–33.
Boutrous Th., Evanson B., The Enduring and Universal Principle of “Fair Notice”, “Southern California Law Review” 2013, vol. 86, s. 195–204.
Choduń A., Aspekty językowe derywacyjnej koncepcji wykładni prawa, Wydawnictwo Naukowe Uniwersytetu Szczecińskiego, Szczecin 2018, https://www.academia.edu/43896506/Aspekty_j%C4%99zykowe_derywacyjnej_koncepcji_wyk%C5%82adni_prawa [dostęp: 10.08.2020].
Ehrett J.S., Against Corpus Linguistics, “The Georgetown Law Journal Online” 2017, vol. 108, s. 51–73.
Goldfarb N., A Lawyer’s Introduction to Meaning in the Framework of Corpus Linguistics, “Brigham Young University Law Review” 2017, issue 6, 1359, https://digitalcommons.law.byu.edu/lawreview/vol2017/iss6/6 [dostęp: 10.08.2020].
Grabowski A., Siła argumentu interpretacyjnego z prawniczego domniemania języka (znaczenia) potocznego, „Zagadnienia Naukoznawstwa” 2016, R. 52, nr 3 (209), s. 357–370.
Gries S., Slocum B.G., Ordinary Meaning and Corpus Linguistics, “Brigham Young University Law Review” 2017, issue 6, 1417, https://digitalcommons.law.byu.edu/lawreview/vol2017/iss6/7 [dostęp: 10.08.2020].
Hessick C.B., Corpus Linguistics and the Criminal Law, “Brigham Young University Law Review” 2017, issue 6, s. 1503–1530.
Hofmański P., Zabłocki S., Wykładnia językowa, w: Elementy metodyki pracy sędziego w sprawach karnych, red. P. Hofmański, S. Zabłocki, Wolters Kluwer, Warszawa 2011, https://sip.lex.pl/#/monograph/369226932/92/hofmanski-piotr-zablocki-stanislaw-elementy-metodyki-pracy-sedziego-w-sprawach-karnych?keyword=pierwsze%C5%84stwo%20znaczenie%20potoczne&cm=SREST [dostęp: 15.01.2021].
Kotowski A., Z problematyki metody interpretacji językowo-logicznej – uwagi na gruncie dekodowania znaczenia prawno-karnego, „Prokuratura i Prawo” 2015, nr 6, s. 101–134.
Kubicka E. i in., Wykorzystanie słowników w interpretacji prawniczej – implikacje praktyczne, „Kwartalnik Sądowy Apelacji Gdańskiej” 2015, nr 1, s. 25–50.
Lee Th.R., Mouritsen S.C., Judging Ordinary Meaning, “The Yale Law Journal” 2017–2018, vol. 127, no. 4, s. 788–1105, https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2937468.
Lee Th.R., Mouritsen S.C., The Corpus and the Critics, “The University of Chicago Law Review” 2021, vol. 88, no. 2, s. 275–365, https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3727504.
Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk B., Podstawy językoznawstwa korpusowego, Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego, Łódź 2005.
Lowe D., Potter Ch., Understanding Legislation: A Practical Guide to Statutory Interpretation, Hart Publishing, Portland, Oregon 2018.
Marek A., Komentarz do art. 216, w: Kodeks karny. Komentarz, red. A. Marek, wyd. V, Wolters Kluwer, Warszawa 2010, https://sip.lex.pl/#/commentary/587269762/59907/marek-andrzej-kodeks-karny-komentarz-wyd-v?cm=URELATIONS [dostęp: 19.01.2021].
Morawski L., Wstęp do prawoznawstwa, Dom Organizatora, Warszawa 2000.
Mouritsen S.C., Corpus Linguistics in Legal Interpretation. An Evolving Interpretative Framework, “International Journal of Language & Law” 2017, vol. 6, s. 67–89, https://doi.org/10.14762/jll.2017.067.
Mouritsen S.C., Hard Cases and Hard Data: Assessing Corpus Linguistics as an Empirical Path to Plain Meaning, “Columbia Science and Technology Law Review” 2011, vol. 13, no. 1, s. 156–205.
Mouritsen S.C., The Dictionary Is Not a Fortress: Definitional Fallacies and a Corpus-Based Approach to Plain Meaning, “Brigham Young University Law Review” 2010, issue 5, s. 1915–1980.
Ortner D., The Merciful Corpus: The Rule of Lenity, Ambiguity and Corpus Linguistics, “Boston University Public Interest Law Journal” 2016, vol. 21, issue 1, s. 101–142, https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2576475.
Phillips J.C., Egbert J., Advancing Law and Corpus Linguistics: Importing Principles and Practices from Survey and Content Analysis Methodologies to Improve Corpus Design and Analysis, “Brigham Young University Law Review” 2017, issue 6, s. 1589–1620.
Raglewski J., Glosa do postanowienia SN z dnia 7 maja 2008 r., III KK 234/07, Lex, 2008, https://sip.lex.pl/#/publication/385968409/raglewski-janusz-glosa-do-postanowienia-sn-z-dnia-7-maja-2008-r-iii-kk-234-07?keyword=Glosa%20do%20postanowienia%20SN%20z%20dnia%207%20maja%202008%20r.,%20III%20KK%20234~2F07&cm=SFIRST [dostęp: 19.01.2021].
Raglewski J., Komentarz do art. 216, w: Kodeks karny. Część szczególna, t. 2, cz. 2: Komentarz do art. art. 212–277d, red. W. Wróbel, A. Zoll, Wolters Kluwer, Warszawa 2017, https://sip.lex.pl/#/commentary/587746479/543919/wrobel-wlodzimierz-red-zoll-andrzej-red-kodeks-karny-czesc-szczegolna-tom-ii-czesc-iikomentarz...?cm=URELATIONS [dostęp: 19.01.2021].
Slocum B.G., Ordinary Meaning, University of Chicago Press, Chicago–London 2016.
Solan L.M., Can Corpus Linguistics Help Make Originalism Scientific?, “Yale Law Review” 2016, vol. 126, s. 57–64, https://www.yalelawjournal.org/forum/can-corpuslinguistics-help-make-originalism-scientific [dostęp: 1.12.2020].
Solan L.M., Gales T., Corpus Linguistics as a Tool in Legal Interpretation, “Brigham Young University Law Review” 2017, issue 6, s. 1311–1357.
Tankersley D., Beyond the Dictionary: Why SUA Sponte Judicial Use of Corpus Linguistics Is Not Appropriate for Statutory Interpretation, SSRN Scholarly Paper, Social Science Research Network, Rochester, NY 2018, https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3117223.
Tkacz S., Zasada nullum crimen sine lege jako źródło poszukiwania językowej granicy wykładni prawa karnego?, „Archiwum Filozofii Prawa i Filozofii Społecznej” 2020, nr 2 (23), s. 81–95, https://doi.org/10.36280/AFPiFS.2020.2.81.
Tobor Z., Zeifert M., Korpusy językowe jako narzędzie interpretacji prawa. Amerykańska teoria i praktyka, „Archiwum Filozofii Prawa i Filozofii Społecznej” 2020, nr 4, s. 80–92.
Tobor Z., Żmigrodzki P., Bielska-Brodziak A., Co każdy prawnik o słownikach wiedzieć powinien, „Przegląd Sądowy” 2008, nr 7–8, s. 79–95.
Urbaniak-Mastalerz I., Współczesny paradygmat wykładni prawa karnego, „Monitor Prawniczy” 2015, nr 24, s. 1309–1318.
Wang A., Googling for Meaning: Statutory Interpretation in the Digital Age, “The Yale Law Journal” 2016, vol. 125, 267, http://www.yalelawjournal.org/forum/googlingfor-meaning-statutory-interpretation-in-the-digital-age [dostęp: 10.08.2020].
Wiatrowski P., Dyrektywy wykładni prawa karnego materialnego w judykaturze Sądu Najwyższego, C.H.Beck, Warszawa 2013, https://pzwl.pl/Dyrektywy-wykladniprawa-karnego-materialnego-w-judykaturze-Sadu-Najwyzszego,4901150,p.html [dostęp: 24.11.2020].
Wróblewski J., Rozumienie prawa i jego wykładnia, Zakład Narodowy im. Ossolińskich, Wrocław–Warszawa–Kraków–Gdańsk–Łódź 1990.
Zawłocki R., O metodzie interpretacji przepisów prawa karnego, „Ruch Prawniczy, Ekonomiczny i Socjologiczny” 2004, nr 4, s. 81–96.
Zgoliński I., W kwestii „granic” występku znieważenia z art. 216 Kodeksu karnego, „Ius Novum” 2013, nr 2, s. 48–57.
Zieliński M., Wykładnia prawa: zasady, reguły, wskazówki, Wolters Kluwer, Warszawa 2012.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
The Copyright Owners of the submitted texts grant the Reader the right to use the pdf documents under the provisions of the Creative Commons 4.0 International License: Attribution-Share-Alike (CC BY SA). The user can copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format and remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose.
1. License
The University of Silesia Press provides immediate open access to journal’s content under the Creative Commons BY-SA 4.0 license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/). Authors who publish with this journal retain all copyrights and agree to the terms of the above-mentioned CC BY-SA 4.0 license.
2. Author’s Warranties
The author warrants that the article is original, written by stated author/s, has not been published before, contains no unlawful statements, does not infringe the rights of others, is subject to copyright that is vested exclusively in the author and free of any third party rights, and that any necessary written permissions to quote from other sources have been obtained by the author/s.
If the article contains illustrative material (drawings, photos, graphs, maps), the author declares that the said works are of his authorship, they do not infringe the rights of the third party (including personal rights, i.a. the authorization to reproduce physical likeness) and the author holds exclusive proprietary copyrights. The author publishes the above works as part of the article under the licence "Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International".
ATTENTION! When the legal situation of the illustrative material has not been determined and the necessary consent has not been granted by the proprietary copyrights holders, the submitted material will not be accepted for editorial process. At the same time the author takes full responsibility for providing false data (this also regards covering the costs incurred by the University of Silesia Press and financial claims of the third party).
3. User Rights
Under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license, the users are free to share (copy, distribute and transmit the contribution) and adapt (remix, transform, and build upon the material) the article for any purpose, provided they attribute the contribution in the manner specified by the author or licensor.
4. Co-Authorship
If the article was prepared jointly with other authors, the signatory of this form warrants that he/she has been authorized by all co-authors to sign this agreement on their behalf, and agrees to inform his/her co-authors of the terms of this agreement.
I hereby declare that in the event of withdrawal of the text from the publishing process or submitting it to another publisher without agreement from the editorial office, I agree to cover all costs incurred by the University of Silesia in connection with my application.
