这不是很有趣吗?欧美幽默的法理分析

Q2 Social Sciences
Natalie Alkiviadou
{"title":"这不是很有趣吗?欧美幽默的法理分析","authors":"Natalie Alkiviadou","doi":"10.7592/ejhr.2022.10.1.649","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper provides a legislative and jurisprudential comparative of European and U.S. case Law on humour. Whilst the Europe-U.S. comparison, in the ambit of expression, has been looked at extensively, there has yet to be a focus on the varying ways in which humour is treated in the two spheres.  What will become evident is the intricacy of cultivating just legal tests to be used by the judiciary in deciphering an inherently abstract theme. At the core of these tests at the European level, is a balancing exercise between the right to offend and the right to be free from offence. However, the multitude of available interpretative routes, in addition to the array of differing human responses to humour, renders such tests and their application legally fragile. This reality raises concerns vis-à-vis the fundamental right of freedom of expression and becomes particularly topical within the current digital age and the ‘polarizing dynamics of social media.’ Godioli (2020:1) The analysis will demonstrate that humour receives much greater protection in the U.S. Framework due to the First Amendment whereas the highest regional human rights court in Europe, namely the European Court of Human Rights is quick to limit humorous speech on grounds of offending others, thereby demonstrating a backsliding of the fundamental freedom of expression, including humorous expression in the region.","PeriodicalId":37540,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Humour Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Ain’t that funny? A jurisprudential analysis of humour in Europe and the U.S.\",\"authors\":\"Natalie Alkiviadou\",\"doi\":\"10.7592/ejhr.2022.10.1.649\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper provides a legislative and jurisprudential comparative of European and U.S. case Law on humour. Whilst the Europe-U.S. comparison, in the ambit of expression, has been looked at extensively, there has yet to be a focus on the varying ways in which humour is treated in the two spheres.  What will become evident is the intricacy of cultivating just legal tests to be used by the judiciary in deciphering an inherently abstract theme. At the core of these tests at the European level, is a balancing exercise between the right to offend and the right to be free from offence. However, the multitude of available interpretative routes, in addition to the array of differing human responses to humour, renders such tests and their application legally fragile. This reality raises concerns vis-à-vis the fundamental right of freedom of expression and becomes particularly topical within the current digital age and the ‘polarizing dynamics of social media.’ Godioli (2020:1) The analysis will demonstrate that humour receives much greater protection in the U.S. Framework due to the First Amendment whereas the highest regional human rights court in Europe, namely the European Court of Human Rights is quick to limit humorous speech on grounds of offending others, thereby demonstrating a backsliding of the fundamental freedom of expression, including humorous expression in the region.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37540,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Humour Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-04-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Humour Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.7592/ejhr.2022.10.1.649\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Humour Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7592/ejhr.2022.10.1.649","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

本文对欧美幽默判例法进行了立法和法理比较。虽然欧美在表达范围内的比较已经被广泛研究,但人们还没有关注幽默在这两个领域的不同处理方式。显而易见的是,培养司法部门用来解读一个固有抽象主题的公正法律测试的复杂性。在欧洲层面,这些测试的核心是在冒犯权和免受冒犯权之间取得平衡。然而,除了人类对幽默的一系列不同反应外,多种可用的解释途径使这种测试及其应用在法律上变得脆弱。这一现实引发了人们对言论自由基本权利的担忧,并在当前的数字时代和“社交媒体两极分化的动态”中成为特别热门的话题Godioli(2020:1)分析将表明,由于第一修正案,幽默在美国框架中得到了更大的保护,而欧洲最高地区人权法院,即欧洲人权法院,很快以冒犯他人为由限制幽默言论,从而表明基本言论自由的倒退,包括该地区的幽默表达。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Ain’t that funny? A jurisprudential analysis of humour in Europe and the U.S.
This paper provides a legislative and jurisprudential comparative of European and U.S. case Law on humour. Whilst the Europe-U.S. comparison, in the ambit of expression, has been looked at extensively, there has yet to be a focus on the varying ways in which humour is treated in the two spheres.  What will become evident is the intricacy of cultivating just legal tests to be used by the judiciary in deciphering an inherently abstract theme. At the core of these tests at the European level, is a balancing exercise between the right to offend and the right to be free from offence. However, the multitude of available interpretative routes, in addition to the array of differing human responses to humour, renders such tests and their application legally fragile. This reality raises concerns vis-à-vis the fundamental right of freedom of expression and becomes particularly topical within the current digital age and the ‘polarizing dynamics of social media.’ Godioli (2020:1) The analysis will demonstrate that humour receives much greater protection in the U.S. Framework due to the First Amendment whereas the highest regional human rights court in Europe, namely the European Court of Human Rights is quick to limit humorous speech on grounds of offending others, thereby demonstrating a backsliding of the fundamental freedom of expression, including humorous expression in the region.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
European Journal of Humour Research
European Journal of Humour Research Social Sciences-Cultural Studies
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
34
审稿时长
6 weeks
期刊介绍: The European Journal of Humour Research (EJHR) is a peer-reviewed quarterly journal with an international multidisciplinary editorial board. Although geographically-oriented towards the ˋold continentˊ, the European perspective aims at an international readership and contributors. EJHR covers the full range of work being done on all aspects of humour phenomenon. EJHR is designed to respond to the important changes that have affected the study of humour but particular predominance is given to the past events and current developments in Europe.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信