从主位推进分析看司法判决推理  

On Judicial Reasoning from the Perspective of Thematic Progression

作　　者：董敏[1] 

机构地区：[1]北京航空航天大学外国语学院,北京100191

出　　处：《北京理工大学学报（社会科学版）》2010年第3期123-127,共5页Journal of Beijing Institute of Technology：Social Sciences Edition

基　　金：2009年度北京航空航天大学外国语学院标志性学术成果项目

摘　　要：司法判决书是裁判过程的书面表达。法官做出裁判的过程,实质上就是以认定的案件事实和相关的法律规范为前提,运用演绎形式推理合乎逻辑地推演出判决结论的司法判决推理过程。综合Danes(1974)提出的5种主位推进模式和徐盛桓(1982)提出的4种主位推进模式,并根据提出的连贯话语推进的9种主位述位逻辑关系,探讨一篇优秀民事判决书的"本院认为……"部分如何实现演绎形式推理和法律命题内容实质推理双重共振的司法判决推理过程,从法律语言学视角对当前我国的裁判文书改革朝着论证体裁方向发展提供有益启示和借鉴。Judicial judgments are the written records of legal proceedings. In nature, it is on the condition that the judge engages himself in the task of judicial reasoning in the form of deductive reasoning by finding legal material facts and applying legal norms in point that the judge makes a judicial decision. On the basis of the five patterns of thematic progression proposed by Danes （1974） and the four patterns of thematic progression advanced by Xu Shenghuan （1982）, as well as the nine logical relations between theme components and rheme components threading a coherent discourse, which are put forward in the present study, a ＂According to the court, ＂＂ ＂text extracted from a well-formed civil case judgment in China is analyzed and interpreted with regard to how it accomplishes a judicial reasoning filled with legal-premise-oriented substantive reasoning in the form of deductive reasoning. The significance of the present study lies in its direct goal to shed insightful implication and enlightment on the current argumentativegenre-oriented reform of judicial judgments in China from a forensic linguistic perspective.

关 键 词：司法判决推理 主位推进模式 主位述位逻辑关系:裁判文书改革 

分 类 号：H0-05[语言文字—语言学]