The paper is intended to test Nivelle and Van Belle's (2007) view on the causal function of counterfactual conditionals in legal discourse. It therefore extends their notion of counterfactuality to a larger corpus-based study of countefactuals, in which two courts - US Supreme Courts and House of Lords - are compared. Results demonstrate that counterfactual conditionals are a widespread resource through which judges construct their argumentation in both analysed courts.
The Centrality of Counterfactual Conditionals in House of Lords and US Supreme Courts Judgments / Mazzi, D. - In: Legal Discourse across Languages and Cultures / M. Gotti, C. Williams. - STAMPA. - Berna : Peter Lang, 2010. - ISBN 9783034304252. - pp. 243-262
The Centrality of Counterfactual Conditionals in House of Lords and US Supreme Courts Judgments
MAZZI, Davide
2010
Abstract
The paper is intended to test Nivelle and Van Belle's (2007) view on the causal function of counterfactual conditionals in legal discourse. It therefore extends their notion of counterfactuality to a larger corpus-based study of countefactuals, in which two courts - US Supreme Courts and House of Lords - are compared. Results demonstrate that counterfactual conditionals are a widespread resource through which judges construct their argumentation in both analysed courts.
Pubblicazioni consigliate
I metadati presenti in IRIS UNIMORE sono rilasciati con licenza Creative Commons CC0 1.0 Universal, mentre i file delle pubblicazioni sono rilasciati con licenza Attribuzione 4.0 Internazionale (CC BY 4.0), salvo diversa indicazione.
In caso di violazione di copyright, contattare Supporto Iris
