{"title":"here-, there-, and every where-:探索代词副词在法律语言中的作用","authors":"David Chandler, Brett Hashimoto","doi":"10.1016/j.acorp.2024.100087","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Many have claimed that pronominal adverbs, such as <em>hereby, thereafter,</em> and <em>wherein</em>, are a frequent, distinctive, and problematic in their use in legal language (<u>Tiersma, 1999</u>; <u>Mellinkoff, 2004</u>). The purpose of this study is to examine those claims empirically. In the present study, the prevalence of PAs in legal registers is compared to more general registers of contemporary American English to determine the extent to which these words are distinctly legal. The study will also explore why different types of PAs may be (in)frequent in specific legal registers to better understand their use. The frequency of PAs was extracted from corpora that are designed to represent six registers of English (3 legal; 4 non-legal). Rates of occurrence of PAs per text were then compared across registers using Kruskal-Wallis tests with Dunn post-hoc test with an eta<sup>2</sup> effect size. Subsequently, a functional analysis describing the uses of PAs was also conducted. The results indicate that PAs are highly restricted to legal registers because of functions that they serve. The types of functions that PAs perform within a text are discussed. A closer examination of the PAs considered both individually as well as grouped by locative adverb (i.e., <em>here-, there-</em>, and <em>where-</em>) indicates that some PAs are also more distinctive to certain legal registers for different reasons. This study opens the discussion as to the utility and necessity of PAs in legal language and provides suggestions for legal writers on how to use or remove PAs without inhibiting clarity or effectiveness.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":72254,"journal":{"name":"Applied Corpus Linguistics","volume":"4 1","pages":"Article 100087"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666799124000042/pdfft?md5=e07e56f679be7690beb03b867265ebaa&pid=1-s2.0-S2666799124000042-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"here-, there-, and every where-: Exploring the role of pronominal adverbs in legal language\",\"authors\":\"David Chandler, Brett Hashimoto\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.acorp.2024.100087\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Many have claimed that pronominal adverbs, such as <em>hereby, thereafter,</em> and <em>wherein</em>, are a frequent, distinctive, and problematic in their use in legal language (<u>Tiersma, 1999</u>; <u>Mellinkoff, 2004</u>). The purpose of this study is to examine those claims empirically. In the present study, the prevalence of PAs in legal registers is compared to more general registers of contemporary American English to determine the extent to which these words are distinctly legal. The study will also explore why different types of PAs may be (in)frequent in specific legal registers to better understand their use. The frequency of PAs was extracted from corpora that are designed to represent six registers of English (3 legal; 4 non-legal). Rates of occurrence of PAs per text were then compared across registers using Kruskal-Wallis tests with Dunn post-hoc test with an eta<sup>2</sup> effect size. Subsequently, a functional analysis describing the uses of PAs was also conducted. The results indicate that PAs are highly restricted to legal registers because of functions that they serve. The types of functions that PAs perform within a text are discussed. A closer examination of the PAs considered both individually as well as grouped by locative adverb (i.e., <em>here-, there-</em>, and <em>where-</em>) indicates that some PAs are also more distinctive to certain legal registers for different reasons. This study opens the discussion as to the utility and necessity of PAs in legal language and provides suggestions for legal writers on how to use or remove PAs without inhibiting clarity or effectiveness.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":72254,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Applied Corpus Linguistics\",\"volume\":\"4 1\",\"pages\":\"Article 100087\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666799124000042/pdfft?md5=e07e56f679be7690beb03b867265ebaa&pid=1-s2.0-S2666799124000042-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Applied Corpus Linguistics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666799124000042\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied Corpus Linguistics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666799124000042","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
许多人认为,诸如 hereby、thereafter 和 wherein 等状语副词在法律语言中的使用频繁、独特且存在问题(Tiersma,1999;Mellinkoff,2004)。本研究的目的就是要通过实证来检验这些说法。在本研究中,PA 在法律语篇中的使用率将与当代美国英语中更普遍的语篇进行比较,以确定这些词在多大程度上具有明显的法律特征。本研究还将探讨不同类型的 PA 在特定法律语篇中(不)频繁出现的原因,以便更好地理解它们的使用。PAs 的频率是从旨在代表六种英语语域(3 种法律语域;4 种非法律语域)的语料库中提取的。然后,使用 Kruskal-Wallis 检验和 Dunn 后置检验以及 eta2 效应大小,比较每个文本中出现的 PAs 的比率。随后,还对 PAs 的用途进行了功能分析。结果表明,PA 因其功能而高度受限于法律注册。本文讨论了 PA 在文本中的功能类型。对单个 PA 和按位置副词(即 here-、there- 和 where-)分组的 PA 的仔细研究表明,某些 PA 由于不同的原因在某些法律文本中更为独特。本研究开启了关于法律语言中扩音词的实用性和必要性的讨论,并就如何在不影响清晰度和有效性的前提下使用或删除扩音词为法律作者提供了建议。
here-, there-, and every where-: Exploring the role of pronominal adverbs in legal language
Many have claimed that pronominal adverbs, such as hereby, thereafter, and wherein, are a frequent, distinctive, and problematic in their use in legal language (Tiersma, 1999; Mellinkoff, 2004). The purpose of this study is to examine those claims empirically. In the present study, the prevalence of PAs in legal registers is compared to more general registers of contemporary American English to determine the extent to which these words are distinctly legal. The study will also explore why different types of PAs may be (in)frequent in specific legal registers to better understand their use. The frequency of PAs was extracted from corpora that are designed to represent six registers of English (3 legal; 4 non-legal). Rates of occurrence of PAs per text were then compared across registers using Kruskal-Wallis tests with Dunn post-hoc test with an eta2 effect size. Subsequently, a functional analysis describing the uses of PAs was also conducted. The results indicate that PAs are highly restricted to legal registers because of functions that they serve. The types of functions that PAs perform within a text are discussed. A closer examination of the PAs considered both individually as well as grouped by locative adverb (i.e., here-, there-, and where-) indicates that some PAs are also more distinctive to certain legal registers for different reasons. This study opens the discussion as to the utility and necessity of PAs in legal language and provides suggestions for legal writers on how to use or remove PAs without inhibiting clarity or effectiveness.