Abstract
Pragmatics concerns itself with discourse as an illocutory act in a dynamic context. Building an ontology means that you describe a state of the world at a certain moment and in a certain form. How is it possible to take into account the dynamic and implicit dimension of legal discourse in the building of an ontology? This article mainly explores the new research area of institutional pragmatics and will conclude with some contradictory perspectives on pragmatics and ontology.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Clancey, W.J.: Situated Cognition: On Human Knowledge and Computer Representations. Cambridge University Press, New York (1997)
Verheij, B.: Artificial argument assistants for defeasible argumentation. Artificial Intelligence 150, 291–324 (2004)
Borges, F., Borges, R., Bourcier, D.: A connectionist model to justify the reasoning of the judge. In: JURIX 2003. IOS Press, Amsterdam (2003)
Perelman, C.: Traité de l’Argumentation. PUF, Paris (1958)
Thiry, P.: Du fondement de l’argumentation. In: Thomasset, C., Bourcier, D. (eds.) Interpréter le droit: le sens, l’interprète, la machine, LGDJ, Paris (1997)
Aarnio, A.: Le rationnel comme raisonnable. In: La justification en droit, LGDJ, Paris (1992)
Austin, J.L.: Quand dire c’est faire. Translation and Presentation by G.Lane, Editions du Seuil, Paris (1979)
Bouveresse, J.: Propos introductifs. In: Amselek, P. (ed.): Théorie des actes de langage, éthique et droit. PUF, Paris (1986)
Searle, J.R.: Indirect speech acts. In: Cole, P., Morgan, J.L. (eds.) Speech acts: syntax and semantics. Morgan, New York (1975)
Ducrot, O., et al.: Les mots du discours. Minuit, Paris (1980)
Anscombre, C., Ducrot, O.: L’argumentation dans la langue. Mardaga, Bruxelles (1983)
Bourcier, D., Bruxelles, S.: D’ailleurs, un argument non necessaire ? Ses fonctions dans le discours du juge. In: Le droit en procès, CURAPP, PUF, Paris, pp. 125–145 (1984)
Bourcier, D., Bruxelles, S.: Discours juridique, interprétation et répresentation des connaissances : les connecteurs d’inclusion. Semiotica 77 (1-3), 253–269 (1989)
Bourcier, D., Bruxelles, S.: Une approche sémantique de l’argumentation juridique, Dire, c’est à dire 45, PUF, Paris (1995)
Dewitz, S.D., Lee, R.M.: Legal procedures as formal conversations. Contracting on a performative network. In: DeGross, J.I., Henderson, J.C., Kosynski, B.R. (eds.) Proceedings of the 10th International conference on Information Systems (1989)
Cekez-Kecmanovic, D.: Activity support systems. In: Proceedings IFORS, Bruges, pp. 24-29 (1991)
Morand, A.: L’évaluation legislative ou l’irrésistible ascension d’un quatrième pouvoir. In : Contrôle parlamentaire et évaluation, Actes du Colloque, 7 avril 1994, La Documentation Française, Paris (1995)
Ouellet, P.: Introduction : the AI turn and language sciences. Semiotica 77(1/3), 1–3 (1989)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2005 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Bourcier, D. (2005). Institutional Pragmatics and Legal Ontology Limits of the Descriptive Approach of Texts. In: Benjamins, V.R., Casanovas, P., Breuker, J., Gangemi, A. (eds) Law and the Semantic Web. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 3369. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-32253-5_10
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-32253-5_10
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-25063-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-32253-5
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)