THE TERM SYSTEM OF MODERN JURIDICAL LINGUISTICS: A CATEGORY OF PREMEDITATION

Anton Lavitski

Information about the author:  Candidate of Philology, Head of Department, Vitebsk branch of International University “MITSO”

e-mail: anton_lavitski@mail.ru

Title: THE TERM SYSTEM OF MODERN JURIDICAL LINGUISTICS: A CATEGORY OF PREMEDITATION

Rubric: PROBLEMS OF SOCIO-POLITICAL AND LEGAL TERMINOLOGY

Language: Russian

Abstract: The need to form one’s own conceptual and categorical framework is an obligatory condition for the stable development of any  research area of focus. The arrangement of the term system is 1) complex manifestations of indicators of accumulated scientific experience  and applied research data, as well as 2) the most important tool for conducting cognitive and research activities. That is why this task is on  the current agenda of modern juridical linguistics.
Legal linguistics actively uses the definitions of both linguistic theory and its directions, and jurisprudence. However, a complete calquing of  the meaning of terminological units does not allow solving problems associated, first of all, with the construction of expert procedures for  analyzing a text for the presence of signs of delinquent speech behavior in its content.
The article gives proof of the necessity of introducing the category of premeditation into the terminological thesaurus of jurisprudence. The significance of this concept is due to the following  factor: intention is not only one of the forms of guilt, but also an identification feature of some crimes committed verbally. Expert determination of this feature of speech activity is impossible in the absence of a juristic terminological definition.
The principle of trans-terminologization, which is the basis for the arrangement; of the formulization of the category of premeditation,  implies the acquisition of previously unusual characteristics in a new scientific and research vocabulary. In the legal linguistic direction,
these characteristics include the intensional dependence of speech activity, as well as the absence of markers for the expression of subjective  opinion in the text, in other words, factolagy. On this basis, we understand premeditation as speech activity determined by intention and not  subjectified by evaluative characteristics.
The proposed terminological definition does not only enter into dissonance with the legal interpretation of premeditation, but also allows,  using verified methods, to conduct a special linguistic study for the acquisition of appropriate signs in the text.

Keywords: premeditation, juridical linguistics, term system, trans-terminologization, intention.

References

1. Adler, A. (2020). Individual’naja psihologija. Moskva: Piter (in Russ.).
2. Baranov, A.N. (2007). Lingvisticheskaja jekspertiza teksta: teorija i praktika. Moskva: Flinta (in Russ.).
3. Gegel’, G. (2009). Filosofija prava. Moskva: Mir knigi (in Russ.).
4. Golev, N.D., Matveeva, O.N. (2006). Lingvisticheskaja jekspertiza: na styke jazyka i prava. In Jurislingvistika–7: jazyk kak fenomen  pravovoj kul’tury (pp. 189–210). Barnaul (in Russ.).
5. Issers, O.S. (2012). Kommunikativnye strategii i taktiki russkoj rechi. Moskva: Izdatel’stvo LKI, 2012 (in Russ.).
6. Kisil, N.V. (2015). Sutnist ta zmist sudovo-ekspertnoi diialnosti u sferi intelektualnoi vlasnosti. Teoriia ta praktyka sudovoi ekspertyzy i kryminalistyky, 15, 346–354 (in Ukr.).
7. Komarova, Z.I. (2010). Problema jazyka nauki. In Aktual’nye problemy germanistiki, romanistiki i rusistiki (pp. 7–24). Ekaterinburg  (in Russ.).
8. Novikov, A.M. (2013). Jenciklopedicheskij slovar’ po psihologii i pedagogike. Moskva: Izdatel’skij centr IJeT (in Russ.).
9. Osadchij, M.A. (2007). Pravovoj samokontrol’ oratora. Moskva: Al’pina Biznes Buk (in Russ.).
10. Smirnov, V.A. (2011). K voprosu o sootnoshenii kategorij “vina” i “cel’” prestuplenija. Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta, 3, 134–137 (in Russ.)