美国统一商法典—买卖编中的模糊限制语研究

摘要

美国统一商法典—买卖编作为美国统一商法典的典型代表,不仅是美国国内从事经济贸易活动的法律保障,而且随着美国成为全球经济最发达的国家,已经产生了世界性的影响。近年来,它所确定的重要规则,不仅在许多国际条约中得到体现,而且还成为各国制定法律的重要借鉴。例如,我国在制订《合同法》时,就借鉴了美国统一商法典—买卖编中的“预期违约”等相关制度。随着我国与美国之间经济往来的增加,许多美国企业与我国建立了经济贸易关系,这就决定了我们有必要全面了解美国统一商法典—买卖编的主要内容,而要了解它的内容,首先要立足于对其语言的学习。人们普遍认为,立法语言应该清楚、明白、准确。对于模糊语言,尤其是模糊限制语在立法语言中的使用情况,人们了解甚少。有关模糊语言在立法语言中的使用情况已开始有人做了一些相关研究,但总体来看,还不够具体、系统,或深度尚有欠缺。美国统一商法典—买卖编作为立法语言之一,是否能够完全彻底的排除模糊限制语的使用呢?回答是否定的。本文作者根据Prince et al.以及Channell等人对模糊限制语的分类,对美国统一商法典—买卖编中的模糊限制语作了详尽的语料分析,目的是想了解模糊限制语在其中的语言表现形式、分类、作用以及使用原因。分析结果表明,作为立法语言之一的美国商法典—买卖编中,不仅允许模糊限制语的使用,而且还依赖于它的使用体现表述的准确性。本文包括七个部分:第一部分简述了此研究的目的、意义、范围以及必要性。第二部分介绍了国内外关于此研究的研究现状。第三部分阐述了Prince et al.以及Channell等人对模糊限制语的分类,并对一些法律原理和基本概念进行了必要的说明。第四部分介绍了此项研究的目的、对象、内容、具体的研究步骤及方法和研究结果。第五部分针对第四部分的结果作了系统的分析,指出了在美国统一商法典—买卖编中模糊限制语的主要语言表现形式,作用以及使用原因。第六部分提出了本研究对法律英语教学以及立法和司法工作的启示。第七部分对全文作了总结,指出了模糊限制语在立法语言中存在的重要意义。同时,作者对教师如何在法律英语的讲授中使学习者意识到模糊限制语的重要作用,以及立法者和司法者掌握模糊限制语的重要意义,提出了一些建议,并指出了一些尚待解决的问题。

目录

Acknowledgements

Abstract in English

Abstract in Chinese

1 Introduction

1.1 The Description of Legal English

1.2 The Description of Hedges

1.3 The Necessity and Purposes of the Present Study

1.4 The Significance of the Present Study

2 Literature Review

2.1 Literature Review on the Studies of Hedges

2.2 Literature Review on the Studies of Vagueness and Legal Indeterminacy

2.2.1 H.L.A.Hart: The 'Open Texture' of Language

2.2.2 The Epistemic Theory: Vagueness in law cannot Lead to Legal Indeterminacy

2.2.3 David Lyons: Law has Special Resources that Eliminate any Indeterminacy

2.2.4 Hans Kelsen: No Genuine gaps in the law

2.2.5 Ronald Dworkin: A Single Right Answer to a Legal Dispute

3 Theoretical Review on the Present Study

3.1 Prince et al's Taxonomy

3.2 On Legislation

3.3 Categories of Approximators

3.3.1 About, Around, Round and Approximately

3.3.2 Sentence A or Sentence B

3.3.3 Number A or Number B

3.3.4 Noun Phrase 'or so' and Number 'or so'

3.3.5 Partial Specifiers

3.3.6 Combinations of Approximators

3.3.7 Exaggeration

3.3.8 Adverbs of Frequency

3.3.9 Referring Vaguely to Categories

4 A Quantitative Analysis of the Hedges in the Uniform Commercial Code-Sales

4.1 The Description of the Present Study

4.2 The Hypothesis of the Present Study

4.3 The Corpus of the Present Study

4.4 The Purposes of the Present Study

4.5 Data Collection and Analysis

4.6 Results and Findings of the Present Study

5 General Discussions of the Present Study

5.1 Major Linguistic Realizations of the Hedges in the Uniform Commercial Code-Sales

5.1.1 Partial Specifiers

5.1.2 Combinations of Approximators

5.1.3 Using a Precise Word with an Expression of Hedging

5.1.4 A High Frequency of 'Any' and 'All'

5.1.5 Hedges Caused by the use of Technical Terms

5.1.6 Hedges Caused by the use of Emotive Words

5.2 Taxonomy and Functions of the Hedges in the Uniform Commercial Code-Sales

5.2.1 Adaptors in the Uniform Commercial Code-Sales

5.2.2 Rounders in the Uniform Commercial Code-Sales

5.3 Reasons of Using Hedges in the Uniform Commercial Code-Sales

5.3.1 Reasons of Using Approximators in the Uniform Commercial Code-Sales

5.3.2 Reason of not Using Shields in the Uniform Commercial Code-Sales

5.4 Use of Hedges and Their Effect on Legal Indeterminacy in the Uniform Commercial Code-Sales

5.5 The Tension Between Certainty and Indeterminacy in the Uniform Commercial Code-Sales

6 Implications of the Present Study

6.1 Implication for Legal English Teaching

6.2 Implications for Draftsmen and Legal Practice

7 Conclusion

7.1 Summary of the Present Study

7.2 Limitations and Recommendations

Bibliography