Comparative Law and Language <div class="page" title="Page 1"> <div class="section"> <div class="layoutArea"> <div class="column"> <p><em><span lang="EN-US">Comparative Law and Language</span></em><span lang="EN-US"> (ISSN 2785-7417) is a scientific journal, online and peer-reviewed, which aims to enhance interest and scientific debate on the relationship between law and language, in and within different national and supranational legal systems, from a comparative perspective. </span><span lang="EN-US">The journal is edited by Trento University and publishes two Issues per year.</span></p> </div> </div> </div> </div> en-US (Prof. Elena Ioriatti) (Mrs Caterina Bergomi) Wed, 26 Jun 2024 15:56:36 +0000 OJS 60 Editorial <p>None</p> Claus Luttermann Copyright (c) 2024 Comparative Law and Language Wed, 26 Jun 2024 00:00:00 +0000 Decoding sign language legal status: exploring a distinct category (or tertium genus) between recognition and officiality <p>In various countries, languages that qualify as “recognised languages” are enshrined in their respective legal frameworks. This designation remains abstract and indeterminate, making it a challenge to precisely define the official status of such recognised languages, particularly in the case of sign languages. The analysis of various legislation related to sign languages highlights commonalities in the formulation of national laws in how they uphold fundamental principles. Sign languages may or may not benefit from features of linguistic officiality, both formally and materially, compared to officially proclaimed spoken languages. Additionally, sign languages align with distinctive elements of linguistic minority rights. In other words, they are not clearly qualified as genuine official languages, like spoken languages, and simultaneously, are not expressly considered minority languages, despite some analogies. It is argued that it is feasible to develop a legal theory called <em>asymmetric linguistic officiality of sign language</em>. Regarding the legal statuses of sign languages, treating them as a third legal category of linguistic officiality in an intersectional sense or, better yet, addressing them as a <em>tertium genus</em> that specifies issues inherent to sign languages based on legal circumstances related to the rights of deaf people.</p> Filipe Venade de Sousa Copyright (c) 2024 Comparative Law and Language Wed, 26 Jun 2024 00:00:00 +0000 Preferred Name in the Brazilian Legal System <p>The purpose of this paper is to address the issue of gender prejudice and discrimination by examining the linguistic and legal aspects of the inclusion of the preferred name (nome social, in Brazilian Portuguese) in the Brazilian legal system. A preferred name refers to the name chosen by a transgender person to be used in place of their registered name. In this discussion, we analyze federal bills, legal decisions, and regulations that have, from 2006 to 2022, contributed to the incorporation of the preferred name into various types of texts in Brazil. We also consider the results of studies that have examined the use of preferred names in the Brazilian media. The data analysis demonstrates that, despite the history of the establishment of this institution being marked by various instances of discrimination and violence, both in legal documents and in the media, the norms related to preferred names have simultaneously represented a significant stride for the public authorities and society to pay more attention to recognizing the rights of transgender individuals. In the case of legal decisions, there has also been a shift in the resolution of conflicts, favoring the principles of free name choice, self-identity determination, and human dignity.</p> Eduardo Tadeu Roque Amaral Copyright (c) 2024 Comparative Law and Language Wed, 26 Jun 2024 00:00:00 +0000 « Splendeur et misère » du multilinguisme institutionnel de l’Union européenne <p>Proud of its unique multilingual regime, which guarantees access to European legislation in 24 equal language versions, the European Union appears to the outside world as an ideal of multilingualism. The clear enshrinement of the equal multilingual regime in the EU's primary and secondary legislation is its splendid face. However, seen from the inside, this idyllic image fades. In fact, the multilingualism advocated by the texts is in the process of disappearing in practice, as English has become the overwhelmingly predominant working language within the EU institutions, as shown by the <em>Lequesne </em>Report prepared by the French Presidency for the Council of the EU in 2022. However, the majority of people do not see this miserable monolingual practice as a problem, but rather as a pragmatic approach dictated by various constraints on the theoretical language regime, particularly at technical and budgetary level. This situation is not only contrary to the rules, it also runs counter to European integration as such.</p> Ivo Petrů Copyright (c) 2024 Comparative Law and Language Wed, 26 Jun 2024 00:00:00 +0000 Law is trapped in history and history is trapped in law? <div class="page" title="Page 1"> <div class="layoutArea"> <div class="column"> <p>Abstract: This paper explores the reciprocal relationship between law and history, highlighting how historical beliefs influence political and legal decision-making. This interdependence is evident in the historical development of legal systems, the incorporation of historical discourse in legal texts, and the legal governance of historical matters. The paper illustrates the integration of historical dimensions and myths into constitutional imaginaries, particularly in Hungary and Poland. There, historical beliefs have driven transformations towards illiberal national myths, influencing political and legal reforms. The study underscores the relevance for legal and constitutional scholars not to overlook the reciprocal relationship between law and history.</p> </div> </div> </div> Michiel Luining, Aleksandra Kubinska Copyright (c) 2024 Comparative Law and Language Wed, 26 Jun 2024 00:00:00 +0000 Semantical Discordances of Comparison in Law Negatively Defined <div class="page" title="Page 1"> <div class="layoutArea"> <div class="column"> <p>Defining comparative law is difficult simply because it is polysemic and contingent in nature. A framework for refinement, differentiation and affirmation is represented by the negative paradigm. Comparative law’s inadequacy to designate the subject is best exemplified by the following neologism, ‘Comparative Law Methodology’. It is argued the latter phrase is distinguished from the former by a redundant lexical addition. Thus, this triad translates a latent divide between object and method already contained in the former idiom. Morphological observations of the distinctive features of a terminology indicate these can be affected alternatively from subservience to precedence by diachronic semantical variations. Modern comparatists naturally concerned with the ascertainment of explicit methodological frameworks extending beyond tacit use improperly refer to this tautological expression.</p> </div> </div> </div> Morad El Kadmiri Copyright (c) 2024 Comparative Law and Language Wed, 26 Jun 2024 00:00:00 +0000 Literature Review: the Language of the Juridification Process of Animal Law <p>The article provides for a literature review, concerning the language of the juridification process of animal law. It considers the interaction between the increasing legal protection of animals and the use of definitions in legal literature. Without providing a thorough examination of all the current English-language literature it provides with some examples, showing the key trend lines.</p> Cinzia Piciocchi Copyright (c) 2024 Comparative Law and Language Wed, 26 Jun 2024 00:00:00 +0000