Law as Social Discourse II
My concern in what follows is to frame, to outline and to exemplify, the general characteristics of a concept of legal discourse or, in the terms of the preceding chapter, a materialist rhetoric of law. Substantively my procedure, one which I will by and large assume to be self-explanatory, will be that of translating the topology of discourse already proposed, into a schematic account of legal discourse. There are, however, two preliminary points to be made, both of which may broadly be said to concern the scope and potential development of what is admittedly a nascent discipline.
KeywordsTransportation Coherence Assimilation Stratification Defend
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes and References
- 23.R. Jakobson, Selected Writings, II (The Hague: Mouton, 1971 ) 567, 565 (my italics).Google Scholar
- 36.For example, Z. K. Bankowski and G. Mungham, Images of Law ( London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1976 );Google Scholar
- T. Mathieson, Law, Society and Political Action ( London: Academic Press, 1980 );Google Scholar
- R. M. Unger, Law in Modern Society ( New York: Free Press, 1976 ).Google Scholar
- 39.Cf. in a slightly narrower context, H. Collins, Marxism and Law (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1983 ) pp. 34–45, 52–74.Google Scholar
- 40.H. Kelsen, General Theory of Law and State (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1945) pp. 216ff.Google Scholar
- 43.See for example, J. A. G. Griffith, The Politics of the Judiciary ( London: Fontana, 1985 ) pp. 17–39;Google Scholar
- A. Paterson, ‘Judges, A Political Elite?’ (1974) British Journal of Law and Society 118.Google Scholar
- 44.D. Garland and P. Young, The Power to Punish (London: Heinemann, 1983) especially chapters 1 and 9.Google Scholar
- 56.R. Barthes, Elements of Semiology ( London: Cape, 1967 ) pp. 89–95.Google Scholar
- 57.O. Ducrot and T. Todorov, Encyclopedic Dictionary of the Sciences of Language ( Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1981 ) p. 21.Google Scholar