Balancing Interpretative Arguments in International Law – A Linguistic Appraisal

Abstract

The interaction between arguments developed under the different means of interpretation of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties is often described in language evoking balancing. The present paper offers a linguistic perspective on this phenomenon. First, it aims to clarify in what situations balancing is actually taking place during an interpretive exercise. Then, it demonstrates how linguistic knowledge can sharpen our assessment in this context. It is shown with examples that help to establish the adequate weight of interpretative arguments developed under the means of interpretation of ordinary meaning. International law and its rules are not displaced in this exercise, but merely better understood by examining their operation through language.