請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/46910
完整後設資料紀錄
DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.advisor | 張文貞(Wen-Chen Chang) | |
dc.contributor.author | Shao-Man Lee | en |
dc.contributor.author | 李韶曼 | zh_TW |
dc.date.accessioned | 2021-06-15T05:43:10Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2010-08-20 | |
dc.date.copyright | 2010-08-20 | |
dc.date.issued | 2010 | |
dc.date.submitted | 2010-08-19 | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/46910 | - |
dc.description.abstract | 本論文借用法律與文學的理論,探討法院判決作為一種文本形式,是否(及如何)可能透過文字風格來幫助判決達到其預設的功能,尤其將重點放在大法官解釋。論文發現,文字風格在理論上的三種功能:(1)建立文本內容與讀者的關聯、(2)建構作者與讀者間的關係、以及(3)在社會中建構意義,都有助於協助文本達成傳遞訊息、說服與溝通三種預設目的。不過,文字風格的使用也可能受到社會與學科脈絡影響,而作者為追求文本功能而選用文字風格時,亦應該將讀者做為最主要的考量。作者也必須要著重觀察社會脈絡,從中獲得對於文本意義的進一步認識。
然而,這些理論究竟能不能適用於法院判決中呢?本文認為,文字風格不但不妨礙判決功能的落實,更可以引領人民閱讀並理解判決、參與判決的討論、表彰人民在這場對話中的參與,進一步幫助判決發揮功能。本文從這樣的角度檢視法院既有的寫作風格,發現既有的判決風格侷限於權威、強調專業,使得大眾難以理解、難以深入思考判決的內容,反倒無法落實判決的功能。 本文也進一步將文字風格的功能與大法官解釋做結合,發現大法官解釋也有用詞冷僻、段落偏少、篇幅過短、修辭方式侷限的問題。這樣的文字風格也同樣侷限了大法官解釋功能的發揮。大法官釋字第666 號解釋,就是一個明顯的例子。 論文因此主張,大法官必須以多重功能、多重讀者為重心,來選擇適切的風格。而在解釋所涉管制結構複雜、利益糾結,又涉及困難的價值、道德與文化辯證時,法院應採用溝通的模式,與大眾建立信賴關係、坦誠以對,並盡量將議題涉及的層面清楚交代,供大眾一起思考,方才有助於解釋功能的達成。 | zh_TW |
dc.description.abstract | This thesis has its perspective from the theoriy of Law and Literature. It explores whether or not a judicial opinion, as a body of text, can have the opinion function as it should, and how it performs. And this thesis has put its emphasis on interpretations made by the Constitutional Court in Taiwan.
This thesis has found that style has three functions theoretically. First, it forms connection between the written and the reader. Second, style develops the relationship of the author and the reader. Last, style creates meanings in society. All of them facilitate text to send messages to the reader, to communicate with the reader and to persuade the reader. However, social context (above all, academic context) has great influence on how style performs. In order to enhance the functions of text, the author should place reader in the first place when selecting appropriate style. Author should also carefully observe the social context, from which one can better understand the social meaning of certain text. However, can the theory truly apply to judicial opinions? According to this thesis, style can help facilitate text to achieve its three functions as above. Style does not hinder judicial opinions from functioning. Far more than that, it can guide people to read and comprehend judicial opinions, to participate in the discussion of the opinions and it embodies people who take part in the discussion. This thesis observes the decisions made by Taiwanese courts. And it found out that the writing style focuses on authority-building, which makes people impossible to comprehend and think it over. Thus the functions of judicial opinion cannot carry out. Moreover, this thesis combines the use of style with the interpretations made by the Constitutional Court in Taiwan. It observes the stylistic features of the interpretations, and discovers that the interpretations, too, have the problems of obscure usages, few paragraphs, insufficient lengths and narrowed rhetoric patterns. This kind of style has also limited the functions of the interpretations. The J.Y. Interpretations 666 is an evident instance of this. Therefore, this thesis argues that Constitutional Court should bear the multiple functions and readers of their interpretations in mind, while selecting the appropriate style. When the interpretations involve complicated regulatory structures, tangled interests, competing values, morals and cultures, the court should adopt the communicative style. Communicative style helps to build a relationship based on trust with readers, and requires the court to make clear of all the aspects relating to the issue for future discussions. | en |
dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2021-06-15T05:43:10Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 ntu-99-R96a21012-1.pdf: 2234203 bytes, checksum: 260e2449b833acde127c5d401806d2b5 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2010 | en |
dc.description.tableofcontents | 序 ............................................. i
摘要 .......................................... iii Abstract ......................................... iv 目次 .......................................... vi 圖目錄 .......................................... ix 表目錄 ......................................... x 1. 緒論 ............................. 1 1.1 研究動機 .................................... 1 1.2 問題界定 .................................... 2 1.3 研究方法 .................................... 3 1.4 名詞定義 .................................... 4 1.5 論文架構 .................................... 5 2.文字風格的功能 ....................... 7 2.1 前言 ....................................... 7 2.1.1 什麼是風格? ............................. 7 2.1.2 跨越學科的文字風格研究 ...................... 8 2.1.3 本章架構 ................................ 11 2.2 形塑文字風格的策略 ............................. 11 2.2.1 修辭 .................................. 12 2.2.2 故事 .................................. 13 2.3 文字風格的功能 ............................... 14 2.3.1 文本可能具有的目標 ........................ 14 2.3.2 文字風格的具體功能 ........................ 15 2.3.3 文字風格的抽象功能:建構意義 .................. 20 2.3.4 小結 .................................. 25 2.4 影響文字風格的因素 ............................. 25 2.4.1 社會脈絡 ................................ 26 2.4.2 讀者 .................................. 27 2.4.3 文本與議題 .............................. 27 2.5 選擇文字風格的具體策略 ......................... 28 2.5.1 重視讀者的文字風格 ........................ 28 2.5.2 掌握社會脈絡與文本功能的文字風格 ................ 29 2.6 本章結論 ................................... 30 3.判決的功能 ......................... 31 3.1 什麼是判決 ................................. 31 3.1.1 判決書的內涵 ............................ 32 3.1.2 判決書的功能 ............................ 35 3.2 判決與判決風格 ............................... 41 3.2.1 文字風格的功能 ............................ 41 3.2.2 文字風格如何與判決發生關聯 .................... 41 3.3 既有風格限縮判決效果 ........................... 55 3.4 本章結論 ................................... 57 4. 大法官解釋的風格 ..................... 59 4.1 什麼是大法官解釋 ............................. 59 4.1.1 大法官解釋的制度目的與設計 .................... 60 4.1.2 大法官解釋的功能 .......................... 64 4.2 大法官解釋與風格 ............................. 69 4.2.1 文字風格的功能 ............................ 69 4.2.2 大法官解釋與風格如何發生關聯 .................. 70 4.3 既有解釋風格限縮解釋功能 ......................... 77 4.3.1 既有解釋的文字風格 ........................ 77 4.3.2 解釋功能的限縮 ............................ 86 4.4 重塑大法官解釋風格 ............................. 87 4.4.1 多重功能、多重對象的解釋風格 .................. 87 4.4.2 解釋風格的選擇:溝通模式與說服模式 .............. 88 4.4.3 輔助大法官解釋發揮功能的相應制度 ................ 89 4.5 本章結論 ................................... 91 5. 憲法解釋的風格與溝通:以大法官釋字第666 號解釋作為分析對象 ................. 93 5.1 釋字第666 號解釋的風格 ......................... 94 5.1.1 文字風格 ................................ 94 5.1.2 媒體的認知及解讀 .......................... 97 5.2 釋字第666 號解釋的風格及其有限的功能 ............... 101 5.2.1 反映審理論證過程? ........................ 101 5.2.2 向全國機關人民說明 ........................ 102 5.2.3 人民信服及制度正當性 ...................... 105 5.2.4 民主正當性 .............................. 106 5.2.5 小結 .................................. 107 5.3 釋字第666 號解釋風格重塑:以溝通模式為導向 ........... 109 5.3.1 性交易的管制脈絡 .......................... 109 5.3.2 釋字第666 號解釋重塑:以溝通為導向 .............. 114 5.4 本章結論 ................................... 120 6. 結論 ............................. 121 參考文獻 ............................ 123 中文文獻 ..................................... 123 英文文獻 ..................................... 133 圖目錄 圖一:文字風格的功能 ............................ 25 圖二:判決與風格的功能關聯 ........................ 58 圖三:大法官解釋文使用字數概況(釋字第1 號至第677 號解釋)......................... 79 圖四:大法官解釋理由書使用字數概況(釋字第80 號至第677 號解釋)..................... 81 表目錄 表一:大法官解釋文平均字數及段落數 .................. 79 表二:大法官解釋理由書平均字數及段落數 ................ 80 表三:釋字第666 號解釋文字數及段落數 ................ 95 表四:釋字第666 號解釋理由書字數及段落數 .............. 95 表五:釋字第666 號解釋及其影響 .................... 99 | |
dc.language.iso | zh-TW | |
dc.title | 判決風格的功能:以大法官解釋為中心 | zh_TW |
dc.title | Functions of Judicial Opinion Styles:Interpretations of the Constitutional Court in Taiwan | en |
dc.type | Thesis | |
dc.date.schoolyear | 98-2 | |
dc.description.degree | 碩士 | |
dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 葉俊榮(Jiunn-rong Yeh),李立如(Li-Ju Lee) | |
dc.subject.keyword | 判決風格,修辭,文字風格的功能,大法官解釋,溝通,說服, | zh_TW |
dc.subject.keyword | styles of judicial opinion,rhetoric,functions of style,J.Y. Interpretations,communication,persuasion, | en |
dc.relation.page | 138 | |
dc.rights.note | 有償授權 | |
dc.date.accepted | 2010-08-20 | |
dc.contributor.author-college | 法律學院 | zh_TW |
dc.contributor.author-dept | 法律學研究所 | zh_TW |
顯示於系所單位: | 法律學系 |
文件中的檔案:
檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
---|---|---|---|
ntu-99-1.pdf 目前未授權公開取用 | 2.18 MB | Adobe PDF |
系統中的文件,除了特別指名其著作權條款之外,均受到著作權保護,並且保留所有的權利。