Comunicación simétrica y asimétrica en los blogs de divulgación jurídica: entre modalidad epistémica y modalidad deóntica

Authors

  • Gianluca Pontrandolfo University of Trieste
  • Sara Piccioni University of Chieti-Pescara

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.7146/hjlcb.v0i58.111684

Keywords:

Legal; blogs (blawgs); corpus-assisted discourse studies (CADS); symmetrical communication; asymmetrical communication; epistemic modality; deontic modality

Abstract

 This paper aims at investigating some discursive features of blawgs, namely legal blogs in which legal experts disseminate and popularise their expertise. More specifically, it involves a corpus-assisted discourse study of the ways in which situational contexts affect the practices and strategies used to represent, construct and communicate legal knowledge. A comparison is drawn between two corpora representative of two different types of communication: a selection of posts written by legal experts for other experts (symmetrical communication) and posts written by legal experts for laypersons (asymmetrical communication). Combining qualitative and quantitative observations, the analysis shows that, in symmetrical communication, the emphasis is on the blogger’s subjective interpretation of legal texts and on his role as knowledge disseminator, as indicated by the predominance of epistemic modality. In asymmetrical communication, on the other hand, the prevalence of deontic modality shifts the focus on to the reader as addressee of the advice, instructions and information provided by the legal expert.

References

Acín Villa, Esperanza 2016: La atenuación en las “Conclusiones” de las tesis de doctorado. En Textos en Proceso, 2(1), 1-24.
Anesa, Patrizia 2016: The deconstruction and reconstruction of legal information in expert-lay online interaction. En ESP Today, 4(1), 69-86.
Anesa, Patrizia/Fage-Butler, Antoinette 2015: Popularizing biomedical information on an online health forum. En Ibérica 29, 105-126.
Anthony, Lawrence 2014: AntConc (Version 3.4.4) [Computer Software]. Tokyo, Japan: Waseda University. [online] http://www.laurenceanthony.net/. (Fecha de consulta:18/11/2017).
Bisiada, Mario 2017: Universals of editing and translation. En Hansen-Schirra, Silvia/Čulo, Oliver/ Hofmann, Sascha (eds.), Empirical modelling of translation and interpreting. Berlin: Language Science Press, 241-275.
Blanchard, Antoine 2011: Science blogs in research and popularization of science: Why, how and for whom? En Cockell, Moira/Billotte, Jérôme/Darbellay, Frédéric/Waldvogel, Francis (eds.), Common knowledge: the challenges of transdisciplinarity,. Lausanne: EPFL Press, 219-232.
Calsamiglia, Helena/ van Dijk, Teo 2004: Popularization Discourse and Knowledge about the Genome. En Discourse & Society, 15(4), 369-389.
Chafe, Wallace 1986: Evidentiality in English conversation and academic writing. En Chafe, Wallace/Nichols, Johanna (eds.), Evidentiality: The linguistic coding of epistemology. Norwood, NJ: Ablex, 261-272.
Corpas Pastor, Gloria 2008: Investigar con corpus en traducción: los retos de un nuevo paradigma. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
de la Válgoma, María 2013: El derecho explicado a los jóvenes. Barcelona: Paidós.
Fairclough, Norman 1989: Language and Power. London: Longman.
Fernández Sanmartín, Alba 2009: La expresión de la modalidad epistémica en el español científico-médico y en el español conversacional: análisis contrastivo. En Cantos Gómez, Pascual/ Sánchez Pérez, Aquilino (eds.), A survey of corpus-based research. Murcia: Asociación Española de Lingüística de Corpus, 576-595.
Ferrari, Laura Daniela 2009: Modalidad epistémica y evidencialidad en las conclusiones de artículos de investigación. En Debate Terminológico 6.
Garzone, Giuliana 2014: Investigating Blawgs through Corpus Linguistics: Issues of Generic Integrity. En Gotti, Maurizio/Giannoni, Davide S. (eds.), Corpus Analysis for Descriptive and Pedagogical Purposes: ESP Perspectives. Bern: Peter Lang, 167-188.
Gotti, Maurizio 2014: Reformulation and recontextualization in popularization discourse. En Ibérica 27, 15-34.
Gutiérrez, Rosa María 2008: El género manual en las disciplinas académicas: Una caracterización desde el sistema de la obligación. En Revista Signos 41(67), 177-202.
Kärkkäinen, Elise 2003: Epistemic Stance in English Conversation. A Description of its Interactional Functions, with a Focus on I think. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Laviosa, Sara 1998 : Core patterns of lexical use in a comparable corpus of English narrative prose. En Meta 43(4), 557–570.
Linell, Per/Luckmann, Thomas 1991: Asymmetries in Dialogue: Some Conceptual Preliminaries. En Marková, Ivana/Foppa, Klaus (eds.), Asymmetries in dialogue 1–20. Hemel Hemstead: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
López Gallardo, José Ramón 2017: Los blawgs: una nueva forma de elaboración de la doctrina jurídico-científica en LawCenterSocial. [online] http://lawcenter.es/w/file/download/66734 (Fecha de consulta: 30/04/2018).
Lyons, John 1977: Semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Mariottini, Laura 2011: Lenguaje jurídico y nuevas tecnologías: análisis de los blogs de abogados. En Maruenda-Bataller, Sergio/Clavel-Arroitia, Begoña (eds.), Multiple Voices in Academic and Professional Discourse: Current Issues in Specialised Language, Research, Teaching and New Technologies. Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 187-198.
Orletti, Franca 2000: La conversazione diseguale: Potere e interazione. Roma: Carocci.
Palmer, F. R. 1986: Mood and Modality. New York, Melbourne: Cambridge University Press.
Partington Alan/Duguid, Alison/Taylor, Charlotte 2013: Patterns and meanings in discourse: theory and practice in corpus-assisted discourse studies (CADS). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins.
Polo, Anna 2013: Valores deónticos en un corpus comparable. En Ondelli, Stefano (ed.), Realizzazioni testuali ibride in contesto europeo. Lingue dell’UE e lingue nazionali a confronto. Trieste: EUT Edizioni Università di Trieste, 107-126.
Pontrandolfo, Gianluca 2017: Géneros divulgativos de la comunicación jurídica: el caso de los ‘blawgs’. En Círculo de Lingüística Aplicada a la Comunicación 72/2017, 177-200.
Preite, Chiara 2013: Comunicare il diritto: strategie di divulgazione del discorso giuridico. En Bosisio, Cristina/Cavagnoli, Stefania (eds.), Comunicare le discipline attraverso le lingue: prospettive traduttiva, didattica, socioculturale, vol. 1. Perugia: Guerra Edizioni, 245-262.
Scott, Mike 2008: WordSmith Tools (Version 5) [Computer Software]. Liverpool: Lexical Analysis Software.
Tessuto, Gerolamo 2015: Posted by…: Scholarly Legal Blogs as part of Academic Discourse and Site for Stance and Engagement. En Textus, 2/15, 85-106.
Ulrych, Margherita/Murphy, Amanda 2008: Descriptive translation studies and the use of corpora: Investigating mediation universals. EnTaylor Torsello, Carol/Ackerley, Kathrine/Castello, Erik (eds.), Corpora for university language teachers. Frankfurt/M.: Peter Lang, 141-166.

Downloads

Published

2018-12-22

How to Cite

Pontrandolfo, G., & Piccioni, S. (2018). Comunicación simétrica y asimétrica en los blogs de divulgación jurídica: entre modalidad epistémica y modalidad deóntica. HERMES - Journal of Language and Communication in Business, (58), 175–191. https://doi.org/10.7146/hjlcb.v0i58.111684

Issue

No. 58 (2018)

Section

Articles

License

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

a. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.

b. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.

c. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).