ABSTRACT

This study is based on the analysis of scholarly law blog posts written by British and American law professors commenting on legal cases relating to US and UK court decisions. The aim is to investigate how law professor bloggers construct their argumentative discourse while communicating with their scholarly legal community. The analysis reveals interesting argumentative strategies and language features which shed light on the argumentative dimension of the genre under examination. More specifically, it emerges that reporting a judge’s or a court’s decision on legal cases is a point of departure for the blogger’s development of his/her argumentative discourse. The overall findings show that bloggers are responding to individual purpose when they engage in the discourse of scholarly legal blogging: while offering personal opinion on legal cases, they try to introduce context of knowledge discussion within the discipline.

摘要

本研究基于对英国和美国法学教授撰写的评论与美国和英国法院判决相关的法律案件的学术法律博客文章的分析。目的是调查法学教授博主如何在与学术法律界交流的同时构建他们的论证性话语。分析揭示了有趣的论证策略和语言特征，它们阐明了所考察体裁的论证维度。更具体地说，报告法官或法院对法律案件的决定是博客作者发展其辩论话语的出发点。总体研究结果表明，博客作者在参与学术法律博客的讨论时是对个人目的做出回应：在对法律案件发表个人意见的同时，