从语义权重到法律本体论——兼论法律文本中概念的分类

IF 1.1 Q3 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Neil Grainger Allison
{"title":"从语义权重到法律本体论——兼论法律文本中概念的分类","authors":"Neil Grainger Allison","doi":"10.1080/03069400.2023.2173918","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT A difficulty with legal vocabulary is that concepts in different legal systems map imperfectly to each other, particularly from common law systems where classification is often unclear or convoluted to codified civil systems. Even within the English language domain there are numerous legal systems where concepts differ, e.g. between Scotland and England. This causes significant problems for students’, especially foreign language students’, reading comprehension and developing understanding of legal lexis where translation dictionaries, while they may be efficient, are imperfect. This article sets out a classification approach to reading and English language legal concept deep understanding rooted in theories from education and cognitive linguistics, in particular Categories and Prototypes, Schema theory, and Legitimation Code Theory (LCT). I have used the approach successfully for some years with international students studying law in Scotland, assisting their reading of textbooks and especially journal articles while building domain knowledge. The application of the strategy is presented in the context of research on the adoption of reading strategies which finds that adoption is influenced by awareness of the complexity of the concepts in the text, complexity of the strategy, and by how much particular strategies are seen as a valid method in legal study.","PeriodicalId":44936,"journal":{"name":"Law Teacher","volume":"57 1","pages":"201 - 217"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"From semantic weight to legal ontology via classification of concepts in legal texts\",\"authors\":\"Neil Grainger Allison\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/03069400.2023.2173918\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT A difficulty with legal vocabulary is that concepts in different legal systems map imperfectly to each other, particularly from common law systems where classification is often unclear or convoluted to codified civil systems. Even within the English language domain there are numerous legal systems where concepts differ, e.g. between Scotland and England. This causes significant problems for students’, especially foreign language students’, reading comprehension and developing understanding of legal lexis where translation dictionaries, while they may be efficient, are imperfect. This article sets out a classification approach to reading and English language legal concept deep understanding rooted in theories from education and cognitive linguistics, in particular Categories and Prototypes, Schema theory, and Legitimation Code Theory (LCT). I have used the approach successfully for some years with international students studying law in Scotland, assisting their reading of textbooks and especially journal articles while building domain knowledge. The application of the strategy is presented in the context of research on the adoption of reading strategies which finds that adoption is influenced by awareness of the complexity of the concepts in the text, complexity of the strategy, and by how much particular strategies are seen as a valid method in legal study.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44936,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Law Teacher\",\"volume\":\"57 1\",\"pages\":\"201 - 217\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Law Teacher\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/03069400.2023.2173918\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Law Teacher","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03069400.2023.2173918","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

摘要法律词汇的一个困难是,不同法律体系中的概念相互映射不完美,特别是从分类往往不清楚或复杂的普通法系到编纂成文的民事体系。即使在英语领域,也有许多概念不同的法律体系,例如苏格兰和英格兰。这给学生,尤其是外语学生的阅读理解和对法律词汇的理解带来了重大问题,尽管翻译词典可能很有效,但并不完善。本文提出了一种基于教育和认知语言学理论的阅读和英语法律概念深层理解的分类方法,特别是分类和原型理论、图式理论和合法代码理论。多年来,我成功地将这种方法用于在苏格兰学习法律的国际学生,帮助他们阅读教科书,尤其是期刊文章,同时积累领域知识。该策略的应用是在阅读策略采用研究的背景下提出的,研究发现,阅读策略的采用受到对文本中概念复杂性的认识、策略复杂性以及特定策略在多大程度上被视为法律研究中的有效方法的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
From semantic weight to legal ontology via classification of concepts in legal texts
ABSTRACT A difficulty with legal vocabulary is that concepts in different legal systems map imperfectly to each other, particularly from common law systems where classification is often unclear or convoluted to codified civil systems. Even within the English language domain there are numerous legal systems where concepts differ, e.g. between Scotland and England. This causes significant problems for students’, especially foreign language students’, reading comprehension and developing understanding of legal lexis where translation dictionaries, while they may be efficient, are imperfect. This article sets out a classification approach to reading and English language legal concept deep understanding rooted in theories from education and cognitive linguistics, in particular Categories and Prototypes, Schema theory, and Legitimation Code Theory (LCT). I have used the approach successfully for some years with international students studying law in Scotland, assisting their reading of textbooks and especially journal articles while building domain knowledge. The application of the strategy is presented in the context of research on the adoption of reading strategies which finds that adoption is influenced by awareness of the complexity of the concepts in the text, complexity of the strategy, and by how much particular strategies are seen as a valid method in legal study.
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
Law Teacher
Law Teacher EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
25.00%
发文量
27
×
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