National contestations against international courts and tribunals are a polymorph object to analyse. While they generally deal with the legitimacy of an international court or tribunal, manifesting discontent with its very existence or work, in some rare cases, national contestations focus on the legal reasoning developed in an international decision. This research will analyse this kind of national contestations in terms of ‘counterhegemonic’ reactions, using the works of Antonio Gramsci and their interpretation in neo-Gramscian scholarship. The purpose is to identify how national contestations articulate a counterhegemonic discourse to build an opposition to the reasoning of an international legal decision, and to deconstruct the linguistic tools that are adopted to facilitate this approach. Requiring a difficult exercise of welding present to future, for the counterhegemonic voice not to replicate a hegemonic discourse with simply different premisses and power intentions, the transformative project behind them is key.

中文翻译：

---

国际法院和法庭的法律推理的全国竞赛：葛兰西语篇分析方法

针对国际法院和法庭的国家争议是一个需要分析的多态对象。虽然它们通常处理国际法院或法庭的合法性，表现出对其存在或工作的不满，但在极少数情况下，国家争议集中在国际裁决中发展的法律推理上。本研究将利用安东尼奥·葛兰西的著作及其在新葛兰西学派中的阐释，从“反霸权”反应的角度分析这种民族争执。目的是确定国家争论如何表达反霸权话语以反对国际法律决定的推理，并解构为促进这种方法而采用的语言工具。