Abstract Capone and Bucca argue that legal interpretation can go significantly wrong when founded upon a false conception of language and linguistic practices. This claim is correct. Specifically, semantic-based theories of linguistic meaning that are based upon the idea that a “core” semantic meaning can be identified outside of context and then needs to be “pragmatically enriched” for specific applications get the project of understanding language use in the legal context profoundly backwards. This paper emphasizes the primacy of an embedded pragmatics over other conceptions of linguistic meaning and practice in law. Herman Oliphant, in “A Return to Stare Decisis” offers an argument that helps strengthen the claim for the “primacy of pragmatics” in law. His work also shows that if the primacy of pragmatics is accepted, not only does this have significant impact upon actual legal practice, but it also highlights worrisome blind spots in currently dominant philosophical theories of law. His argument is that a conception of law that is centered upon such an appeal to principle, stare dictis, leads to a legal practice based upon distorting abstractions and a false conception of language use in law pulled out of its worldly roots. Because of this, he argues that stare dictis is detrimental to a living and empirically effective and informed legal system. Hence the need for a return of stare decisis properly understood. His article gives some grounds for critiquing many dominant philosophical theories of law. Oliphant’s theory is, importantly, compatible with, and supported by, a picture of language use offered by Jaszczolt and recent work in neuropragmatism. This, in turn, can be thought as further verification of Capone and Buccas’ assertion that the adoption of a false theory of language can have far ranging and detrimental effects upon legal practice and legal theory.

中文翻译：

---

赫尔曼·奥利潘特（Herman Oliphant），凝视决策和法律推理中的语用学至高无上（简要介绍了神经语用学）

摘要Capone和Bucca认为，如果以错误的语言和语言实践概念为基础，法律解释可能会大为错误。这个说法是正确的。具体来说，基于语义的基于语义的理论基于以下思想：可以在上下文之外识别“核心”语义，然后针对特定应用需要对其进行“实用的丰富”，从而获得了理解法律中语言使用的项目上下文深深地倒退了。本文强调了嵌入式语用学在法律意义和法律实践的其他概念上的首要地位。赫尔曼·奥利潘特（Herman Oliphant）在“重回决定中”一文中提出了一个论点，该论点有助于加强对法律中“实用主义至上”的主张。他的工作还表明，如果接受实用主义的至高无上的地位，这不仅对实际的法律实践有重大影响，而且还突出了当前占主导地位的法哲学理论中令人担忧的盲点。他的论点是，以对原则的这种诉求为中心的法律观念，即凝视法令，导致了一种基于扭曲抽象的法律实践，而法律的语言使用的虚假观念则脱离了其世俗的根源。因此，他认为凝视的命令不利于有效的，经验有效的和知情的法律制度。因此，正确理解返回凝视的必要性。他的文章为批判许多主要的哲学哲学理论提供了依据。重要的是，奥利潘特的理论与雅斯佐尔特（Jaszczolt）提供的语言使用图景以及最近在神经实用主义方面的工作相兼容并得到其支持。这，