Law in signification processes

Jan M. Broekman, Larry Cata Backer

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter

Abstract

The purpose of this book is not to produce a (hitherto unwritten) history of semiotics in the 20th century, nor to describe the applicability of semiotics in law and legal discourse. The text focuses on a deeper problem. Semiotics, daughter of linguistics at the end of the 19th century, still suffers from predominantly static featuresthose static properties do thoroughly infect law in its exegesis, interpretation, fact-finding, judgment, for short: its mechanistic jurisprudential dimensions. How can legal semiotics be set free from those static properties, when lawyers feel safe with them? The proper location of the question is in the heart of signification processes. With this in mind, one reads Peirce, who distinguished between ˜universes and ˜the universe; one reads Welby who stated 1906: if we are individual in any sense we are merely items; one reads the Russian structural linguist Saumjan who distinguished surface structures of language from deep structures, and one reads that idea with Greimas as well as Kristeva. They are altogether attempts to bring dynamics in semiotics and signification/meaning.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Title of host publicationSigns in Law - A Source Book
Subtitle of host publicationThe Semiotics of Law in Legal Education III
PublisherSpringer International Publishing
Pages323-336
Number of pages14
ISBN (Electronic)9783319098371
ISBN (Print)9783319098364
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2015

Fingerprint

Lawyers
Linguistics
Nuclear Family
semiotics
Language
Law
exegesis
lawyer
Signification
linguistics
interpretation
discourse
history
language

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Social Sciences(all)
  • Arts and Humanities(all)
  • Psychology(all)

Cite this

Broekman, J. M., & Backer, L. C. (2015). Law in signification processes. In Signs in Law - A Source Book: The Semiotics of Law in Legal Education III (pp. 323-336). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-09837-1_30
Broekman, Jan M. ; Backer, Larry Cata. / Law in signification processes. Signs in Law - A Source Book: The Semiotics of Law in Legal Education III. Springer International Publishing, 2015. pp. 323-336
@inbook{f2ab66ddb8e540e6a43af40c4201c03a,
title = "Law in signification processes",
abstract = "The purpose of this book is not to produce a (hitherto unwritten) history of semiotics in the 20th century, nor to describe the applicability of semiotics in law and legal discourse. The text focuses on a deeper problem. Semiotics, daughter of linguistics at the end of the 19th century, still suffers from predominantly static featuresthose static properties do thoroughly infect law in its exegesis, interpretation, fact-finding, judgment, for short: its mechanistic jurisprudential dimensions. How can legal semiotics be set free from those static properties, when lawyers feel safe with them? The proper location of the question is in the heart of signification processes. With this in mind, one reads Peirce, who distinguished between ˜universes and ˜the universe; one reads Welby who stated 1906: if we are individual in any sense we are merely items; one reads the Russian structural linguist Saumjan who distinguished surface structures of language from deep structures, and one reads that idea with Greimas as well as Kristeva. They are altogether attempts to bring dynamics in semiotics and signification/meaning.",
author = "Broekman, {Jan M.} and Backer, {Larry Cata}",
year = "2015",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1007/978-3-319-09837-1_30",
language = "English (US)",
isbn = "9783319098364",
pages = "323--336",
booktitle = "Signs in Law - A Source Book",
publisher = "Springer International Publishing",

}

Broekman, JM & Backer, LC 2015, Law in signification processes. in Signs in Law - A Source Book: The Semiotics of Law in Legal Education III. Springer International Publishing, pp. 323-336. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-09837-1_30

Law in signification processes. / Broekman, Jan M.; Backer, Larry Cata.

Signs in Law - A Source Book: The Semiotics of Law in Legal Education III. Springer International Publishing, 2015. p. 323-336.

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter

TY - CHAP

T1 - Law in signification processes

AU - Broekman, Jan M.

AU - Backer, Larry Cata

PY - 2015/1/1

Y1 - 2015/1/1

N2 - The purpose of this book is not to produce a (hitherto unwritten) history of semiotics in the 20th century, nor to describe the applicability of semiotics in law and legal discourse. The text focuses on a deeper problem. Semiotics, daughter of linguistics at the end of the 19th century, still suffers from predominantly static featuresthose static properties do thoroughly infect law in its exegesis, interpretation, fact-finding, judgment, for short: its mechanistic jurisprudential dimensions. How can legal semiotics be set free from those static properties, when lawyers feel safe with them? The proper location of the question is in the heart of signification processes. With this in mind, one reads Peirce, who distinguished between ˜universes and ˜the universe; one reads Welby who stated 1906: if we are individual in any sense we are merely items; one reads the Russian structural linguist Saumjan who distinguished surface structures of language from deep structures, and one reads that idea with Greimas as well as Kristeva. They are altogether attempts to bring dynamics in semiotics and signification/meaning.

AB - The purpose of this book is not to produce a (hitherto unwritten) history of semiotics in the 20th century, nor to describe the applicability of semiotics in law and legal discourse. The text focuses on a deeper problem. Semiotics, daughter of linguistics at the end of the 19th century, still suffers from predominantly static featuresthose static properties do thoroughly infect law in its exegesis, interpretation, fact-finding, judgment, for short: its mechanistic jurisprudential dimensions. How can legal semiotics be set free from those static properties, when lawyers feel safe with them? The proper location of the question is in the heart of signification processes. With this in mind, one reads Peirce, who distinguished between ˜universes and ˜the universe; one reads Welby who stated 1906: if we are individual in any sense we are merely items; one reads the Russian structural linguist Saumjan who distinguished surface structures of language from deep structures, and one reads that idea with Greimas as well as Kristeva. They are altogether attempts to bring dynamics in semiotics and signification/meaning.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84955408143&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84955408143&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/978-3-319-09837-1_30

DO - 10.1007/978-3-319-09837-1_30

M3 - Chapter

AN - SCOPUS:84955408143

SN - 9783319098364

SP - 323

EP - 336

BT - Signs in Law - A Source Book

PB - Springer International Publishing

ER -

Broekman JM, Backer LC. Law in signification processes. In Signs in Law - A Source Book: The Semiotics of Law in Legal Education III. Springer International Publishing. 2015. p. 323-336 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-09837-1_30