《民法典(草案)》立法语言之多维检视  

A Multidimensional Review of Legislative Language in the Civil Code

作　　者：庞伟伟 Pang Weiwei

机构地区：[1]中国人民大学法学院

出　　处：《法治社会》2020年第3期65-77,共13页Law-Based Society

基　　金：司法部2019年度国家法治与法学理论研究项目“我国人类胚胎基因编辑立法研究”(项目编号:19SFB2035)的阶段性成果。

摘　　要：《民法典(草案)》的立法语言在准确性、统一性和简洁性上仍有不足。首先,尽管草案使用了更准确的名词、动词、连词和短句并增加了更准确的限定,但部分动词有待商榷、部分连词似有错误、部分副词明显不当、部分改进有失简洁。其次,草案的动词、连词、短语和句式尽管都更符合统一性的要求,但存在顾内忘外、忽视例外、忽视变种和忽视细节的问题。再则,尽管草案删除了一些丧失价值的条款、避免了一些语义重复的问题、省略了一些可有可无的成分、统合了一些过于零碎的表述,但却存在遗漏之处;尽管使用了一些更简洁的搭配和句式,但既未重视特定词语的简化效用也未严守去繁就简的一般原则。制定法典词目索引和设立法典审读委员会有助于完善法典的立法语言,但审议工作应尽可能精细化。The legislative language of the Civil Code(Draft) has made progress in accuracy, unity and simplicity,but it is still insufficient. Firstly, although the Draft uses more accurate nouns,verbs, conjunctions and short sentences and adds more accurate determiners, there is still a lot of room for improvement and some modifications are not concise.Secondly, although the verbs,conjunctions, phrases and sentence patterns in the draft are more in line with the requirements of unity after being modified, there are still some problems, such as amending one thing and losing another and ignoring exceptions, variations and details. Furthermore, although the Draft has deleted some worthless clauses and dispensable elements, partially solved the problem of semantic duplication and integrated some extremely fragmentary expressions, there is still room for improvement in its wording. The Draft uses some more concise collocation and sentence patterns, but it does not pay attention to the simplification effect of specific phrases and strictly abide by the general principle of simplification.The establishment of a codex lexicon index and a codex review committee is helpful to improve the legislative language of the Code, but the review should be as detailed as possible.

关 键 词：《民法典(草案)》 立法语言 准确性 统一性 简洁性 

分 类 号：D90-055[政治法律—法学理论] D923[政治法律—法学]