Email this article A Critical Discourse Analysis and reformulation approach to the Dublin III Regulation
Abstract
Abstract – This study is the result of an interest in Critical Discourse Analysis applied to the legal discourse of immigration. Its aim is to analyze the features characterizing the Dublin III Regulation (which is criticized because it fails in speeding up the analysis of asylum applications and in clearly assigning responsibility to a specific EU State) by applying Critical Discourse Analysis and taking into account the different linguistic points of view readers may use while conceptualizing a message. During the process of law drafting, legal experts are influenced by their own cultural mental schemata. This relevant, yet often ignored aspect of law making is a cause of difficulty which makes western legal texts inaccessible to receivers with different socio-cognitive schemata. Unfortunately, all the linguistic and syntactical features characterizing legal texts are justified by the fact that laws belong to the category of specialized discourse, which has its own features which diverge from everyday language. As it will be discussed, some of the most common features used in western legal texts are alien to migrants, therefore, after pragmatically analyzing the Regulation, this study wants to provide a possible and more accessible reformulation of the legal text, aiming to make the Dublin III Regulation more accessible to the multicultural audience it addresses. To verify the accessibility of the intralingual translation, both the original Articles and the reformulation have been submitted to a group of migrants.
References
Anderson J.R. 1980, Cognitive Psychology and Its Implications, Freeman, San Francisco.
Austin J.L. 1962, How to Do Things with Words, Clarendon Press, Oxford.
Bares K. 1972, The Morphological Features of Technical English and their Presentation in Teaching, in Fried V. (ed.), The Prague School of Language and Linguistics, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 128-141.
De Beaugrande R. and Dressler W. 1981, An Introduction to Text Linguistics, Longman, London.
Blommaert J. 1997, Workshopping: Notes on Professional Vision in Discourse Analysis, UIA-GER, Antwerp.
Brown G. and Yule G. 1983, Discourse Analysis, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Carrell P.L. and Eisterhold J.C. 1988, Interactive Approaches To Second Language Learning, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Chomsky N. 1965, Aspects of the Theory of Syntax, The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
Chomsky N. 1975, Reflections on Language, Pantheon Books, New York.
Chomsky N. 1981, Lectures on Government and Binding, Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin.
European Union 2013, Joint Practical Guide for persons involved in the drafting of European Union legislation, Brussels.
Fairclough N. 1995, Critical Discourse Analysis, Longman, London.
Firth J.R. 1957, The Techniques of Semantics, in “Papers in Linguistics 1934-51”, Oxford University Press, London, pp. 7-33.
Gotti M. 2005, Investigating Specialized Language, Peter Lang, Bern.
Gregory M. and Carroll S. 1978, Language and Situation: Language Varieties and their Social Contexts, Routledge and Kegan Paul, London.
Grice H.P. 1975, Logic and Conversation, in Cole P. and Morgan J. (eds), Syntax and Semantics 3: Speech acts, Academic Press, New York, pp. 41-58.
Grice H.P. 1981, Presupposition and Conversational Implicature, in Cole P. (ed.), Radical Pragmatics, Academy Press, New York, pp. 183-198.
Guido M.G. 2004a, Cross-cultural Miscommunication in Welfare Officers’ Interrogations, in Candlin C.N. and Gotti M. (eds.), Intercultural Aspects of Specialized Communication, Peter Lang, Bern, pp. 127-145.
Guido M.G. 2004b, Mediating cultures: A Cognitive Approach to English Discourse for the Social Sciences, LED, Milan.
Guido M.G. 2005, Context Misconstructions in Professional Entextualizations of “Asylum” Discourse, in Cortese G. and Duszak A. (eds), Identity, Community, Discourse: English in Intercultural Settings, Peter Lang, Bern, pp. 183-205.
Guido M.G. 2008, English as a Lingua Franca in Cross-cultural Immigration Domains, Peter Lang, Bern.
Halliday M. 1970a, Language Structure and Language Function, in Lyons J. (ed.), New Horizons in Linguistics, Penguin, Harmondsworth, pp. 140-165.
Halliday M. 1970b, Functional Diversity in Language as Seen from a Consideration of Mood and Modality in English, in “Foundations of Language” 4, pp. 225-242.
Halliday M. 1976, Deep Grammar: System as Semantic Choice, in Kress G. (ed.), Halliday: System and Function in Language, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 88-100.
Halliday M. 1978, Language as Social Semiotic: The Social Interpretation of Language and Meaning, Edward Arnold, London.
Halliday M. 1985, An Introduction To Functional Grammar, Edward Arnold, London.
Halliday M. 1990, New Ways of Analysing Meaning, in “Journal of Applied Linguistics” 6, pp. 7-36.
Halliday M. 1994, An Introduction to Functional Grammar, Edward Arnold, London.
Hymes D.H. 1974, Foundation in Sociolinguistics: An Ethnographic Approach, University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia.
Hymes D.H. 1981, “In Vain I Tried to Tell You”: Essays in Native American Ethnopoetics, University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia.
Hymes D.H. 1996, Ethnography, Linguistics, Narrative Inequality: Toward an Understanding of Voice, Taylor and Frances, London.
Hymes D.H. 2003, Now I Know Only So Far: Essays in Ethnopoetics, University of Nebraska Press, Nebraska.
Johnson M. 1987, The Body in the Mind: The Bodily Basis of Meaning, Imagination and Reason, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Langacker R.W. 1991, Foundations of Cognitive Grammar, Stanford University Press, Stanford.
Lyons J. 1977, Semantics, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Neubert A. and Shreve G.M. 1992, Translation as Text, Kent State University Press, Kent, Ohio.
Palmer F.R. 1979, Modality and the English Modals, Longman, London.
Palmer F.R. 1986, Mood and Modality, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Procaccia U. 1979, Readable Insurance Policies: Judicial Regulation and Interpretation, in “Israel Law Review” 14 [1], pp. 74-103.
Provenzano M.R. 2008, The EU Legal Discourse of Immigration: a Cross-cultural Cognitive Approach to Accessibility and Reformulation, FrancoAngeli, Milan.
Roberts C. and Sarangi S. 1999, Talk, Work and Institutional Order: Discourse in Medical, Mediation, and Management Settings, Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin.
de Saussure F. 1959, Course in General Linguistics, Philosophical Library, New York.
Searle J.R. 1969, Speech Acts, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Sweetser E.E. 1990, From Ethymology to Pragmatics: Metaphorical and Cultural Aspects of Semantic Structure, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Urban G. and Silverstein M. 1996, Entextualization, Replication, and Power, in Urban G. and Silverstein M. (eds.), Natural Histories of Discourse, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp. 21-44.
van Dijk T.A. 1980, Macrostructures: An Interdisciplinary Study of Global Structures in Discourse, Interaction and Cognition, Erlbaum, Hillsdale.
van Dijk T.A. 1998, Ideology, Sage, London.
van Dijk T.A. and Kintsch W. 1983, Strategies of Discourse Comprehension, Academic Press, New York.
Widdowson H.G. 1996, Linguistics, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Full Text: pdf
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
