| چکیده انگلیسی مقاله |
Previous research have considered presupposed knowledge as a communicational difficulty in conceiving the meaning of the articles of the legal cods by the reader / addressee. The main question is this: to which extent is the scope of the presumed knowledge? The hypothesis in this research, based on the functional grammar approach, is that the scope of presumed knowledge extends to the extent that in-text and out-of-text references expand the scope of text and meaning. We, in implementation, based on some selective and incidental articles from the Code of Criminal Procedure (CCP), have followed the scope of their references in order to discover its in-text and out-of-text network. The research results show that the domain of presumed knowledge, networked, includes all law codes, legal texts, legal theories, judicial structure, and related knowledge. The following types of references continuously delay the meaning of the clause and article to the last frontiers of presupposed knowledge: explicit references (in-text and out-of-text), implicit references (in-text and out-of-text) including: heterogeneous references, concurrent references, iterative references, and negative reference. Heterogeneous references show that criminal laws (Code of Criminal Procedure, Penal Code, and other criminal codes) focus on the "crime" as the core signifier reflecting the network of knowledge which is presupposed. The results show that any reference, even explicit reference, creates a level of communication complexity and becomes more difficult when the articles, rules, and texts refer to each other back and forth.
Introduction Law articles are often known for their complexity and difficulty (incomprehensibility), having specialized words, long sentences, etc. that have been mentioned as factors for this complexity and difficulty. Even in places where the text of the article has no difficulty in terms of words and has a very simple syntax, the inability of readers to understand these texts is reported. It seems that the global simplification movement has not been very effective in solving the problem so far.
Hatefi (2020) examines the difficulty of legal language by focusing on Articles 1 to 7 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, within the framework of Halliday's Functional Grammar, and considers the greatest difficulty in the language of law to be due to the implicit knowledge that the legislature places on presuppositions. It forces the reader to receive the clauses of the articles through implicit interpretation. The main question is what the scope of the presupposed knowledge is? The research hypothesis, based on the Systemic Functional Grammar, is that the scope of presupposed knowledge extends to the extent that in-text and out-of-text references expand the scope of text and meaning.
Literature review In analyzing the difficulty and complexity of the legal language in general, and the language of the codes in particular, there are two approaches: the traditional approach and the modern approach. The traditional approach in examining the difficulty of legal language focuses on words (Habibi, 1995; Mirbabaei, 2012; Salehi Rad, 2012). The modern approach pays attention to syntactic difficulties and tries theoretical approaches to examine the difficulty of the language of law (Crandall & Charrow, 2000; Gibbons, 2003; Tiersma, 1999). In addition to the lexical aspects, they also consider two grammatical and semantic aspects with respect to the difficulty of legal language. Syntactic features such as having long and complex sentences, excessive use of unknown construction, indefinite reference of pronouns, repeated negation, nomenclature, and use of reference letters or punctuation were also taken into account. Latifikhah (2002) and Roshan & Behboodi (2009) have mentioned compound sentences, impersonal constructions, unknown constructions, and follower constructions as difficult factors in legal language. Hatefi (2020) examines the difficulty of legal language by focusing on Articles 1 to 7 of the Code of Civil Procedure, within the framework of Halliday's Functional Grammar, and considers the greatest difficulty in the language of law to be due to the added presupposed knowledge that the legislature burden on the reader and forces him/his to receive the text of the articles by implicit interpretation. The novelty of the present study is that it reveals the scope of presupposed knowledge taken in the text of the law and the different methods of presupposing and interpreting it.
Methodology The present article has chosen the Code of Criminal Procedure as the main corpus in research. In the process of analysis, I will first randomly select some articles of this act by the discussion, and then, by following the path of references in the text of the code and other codes and sources, I will add to it. The theory and method of analysis in this paper is Systemic Functional Grammar. From a functional point of view, language is a system of communication. According to the Systemic Functional Grammar, form and structure serve the role of communication, and everything is explained by reference to the communicative and functional role of language (Halliday, 1994: xiii).
Results The results of the research showed that any reference, even explicit reference, has a suspensive role in the meaning of the paragraph, and therefore, as in-text and extra-text references are added, the scope of the text becomes more open and the reader becomes more confused to communicate with the text. The present study shows that in teaching and reading the articles of the code, the reader should receive each concept in a network by linking each article of the code with other articles of that code and with all the legal knowledge. This connection becomes more difficult when articles, codes, and texts refer to each other back and forth. The scope of references indicates the scope of presupposed knowledge for understanding the Code of Criminal Procedure and any legal text, including all laws and legal sources. Within the reference network of criminal law, the concept of "crime" as a central signifier is at the center of the reference and knowledge network. References through repetition, concurrency, negative references, and heterogeneous references are implicit referencing methods that impose more complexity on the reader's relationship to the text of the code. Therefore, in order to reduce the difficulty and complexity of the reader's relationship with the text of criminal law, it is better for the legislator to separate the clauses arising from the two disciplines of crime (criminology) and punishment as much as possible by providing a clear representation of the meaning of crime.
|