UDC

811.112.2’42’366.5(045)

Authors

Chekalin Aleksandr Alekseevich
Institute of Philology and Cross-Cultural Communication,
Northern (Arctic) Federal University named after M.V. Lomonosov
17 nab. Severnoy Dviny, Arkhangelsk, 163001, Russian Federation;
e-mail: a.chekalin@narfu.ru

Abstract

This article considers the role of grammatical categories in the formation of German legal discourse and studies the interaction between the categories of temporality, modality, person and voice as main contributors to the actualization of communicative intention of legal discourse. It is emphasized here that this type of discourse is constructed to regulate the relations between the state and its citizens. The author argues that grammatical categories are one of the most important tools for constructing discourse and suggests studying discourse from the viewpoint of structural linguistics, which allows one to identify both purely linguistic and functional features of representation of linguistic material. The author points out that the grammatical categories listed above do not exist in isolation but in interaction specific of this type of discourse. Such interpenetration of the categories is described within discourse grammar, which considers linguistic phenomena in their entirety. This study aims to demonstrate what grammatical forms, representing the corresponding grammatical categories, are used to constitute legal discourse. The paper consistently describes the strategy of grammatical form selection in the process of legal discourse construction. At the same time, the author focuses on the convergence of such characteristics as atemporality, impersonality, and modality of instruction, achieved by the interaction between the corresponding grammatical categories.

Keywords

discourse grammar, grammatical category, German legal discourse, interaction of categories

References

1. Beylinson L.S. Funktsii institutsional’nogo diskursa [Institutional Discourse Functions]. Vestnik Irkutskogo gosudarstvennogo lingvisticheskogo universiteta, 2009, no. 3, pp. 142–147.
   
2. Plungyan V.A. Diskurs i grammatika [Discourse and Grammar]. Issledovaniya po teorii grammatiki. Vyp. 4. Grammaticheskie kategorii v diskurse [Studies into the Theory of Grammar. Vol. 4. Grammatical Categories in Discourse]. Moscow, 2008, pp. 7–34.
   
3. Danilova N.K. “Znaki sub”ekta” v diskurse [”Signs of the Subject” in Discourse]. Samara, 2001. 228 p.
   
4. Kazantseva Yu.M. Vozmozhna li grammatika diskursa? [Is There Such a Thing as Discourse Grammar?]. Germanistika: sostoyanie i perspektivy razvitiya: tez. dokl. mezhdunar. konf., posvyashch. pamyati prof. O.I. Moskal’skoy [German Studies: The State and Prospects of Development: Outline Reports Int. Conf. in the Memory of Prof. O.I. Moskalskaya]. Moscow, 2004, pp. 19–20.
   
5. Kazanceva J.M. Von der Textgrammatik zur Diskursgrammatik. DAS WORT: Germanistisches Jahrbuch, 2004, pp. 479–489. 6. Grigor’eva V.S. Diskurs kak element kommunikativnogo protsessa: pragmalingvisticheskiy i kognitivnyy aspekty [Discourse as an Element of Communication Process: The Pragmalinguistic and Cognitive Aspects]. Tambov, 2007. 288 p.