Թեմա - Styistic devices in legal documents
Տեսակ - Կուրսային, անհատական և ստուգողական աշխատանքներ
Գին - 3000 դրամ
Առարկա - Անգլերեն լեզվով
Էջեր - 10
1. Lexical Stylistic Devices
2. Syntactic Stylistic Devices
2. Danet, B. Legal Discourse. In: Van Dijk, T.A. Handbook of Discourse Analysis. London: Academia Press, 1985. Volume 1, pp. 273-291.
3. Firbas, J. Functional Sentence Perspective in Written and Spoken Communication. :
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992.
4. Galperin I.R. Stylistics. – M.: Higher School, 1977.
5. Griew, E. J. The English Legal System in a Nutshell. London: Sweet and Maxwell, 1957.
6. Gustafsson, M. Binomial Expressions in Present-day English: a Syntactic and Semantic Study. Turku: Turun Yliopisto, 1975.
7. Hiltunen, R. Chapters on Legal English: Aspects Past and Present of the Language of the Law.
There are the following lexical stylistic devices in English: metaphor, metonymy, allusion, irony, zeugma and pun, epithet, oxymoron, antonomasia, simile, hyperbole, periphrasis, clichռs, proverbs, epigram, quotations. The following lexical stylistic devices are frequently used in the legal documents: simile, metaphors, metonymy, imagery, allusion, etc.
Legal writing can also benefit from several rhetorical devices, including imagery, figures of speech, word choice and literary allusion. Vivid imagery is always more memorable, hence likely more persuasive, than colorless or muted language. For example, if you were writing the statement of facts for a memorandum or brief in a drunk-driving case, you could write: “On his way out the door, Smith staggered against a serving table, knocking a bowl to the floor.” But your description would better evoke intoxication if you wrote: “On his way out the door, Smith staggered against a serving table, knocking a bowl of guacamole dip to the floor and splattering guacamole on the white shag carpet.”
Figures of speech are designed primarily to add drama and emphasis to a discussion. They do so by using familiar words in an unfamiliar way, often injecting eloquence into an otherwise mundane sentence. Consider, for example, two figures of speech traceable to classical rhetoric: “isocolon” and “antithesis.” Isocolon denotes a sequence of clauses of identical length, and antithesis is a method of contrasting ideas through the use of opposites. Both techniques are evident in the following sentence:
The patent system rewards those who can and do, not those who can but don’t. The clauses “those who can and do” and “those who can but don’t” illustrate isocolon because they are of identical length. They also illustrate antithesis because they present direct contrasts by juxtaposing a word and its opposite twice in quick succession. The rhythm of the two matching clauses and the juxtapositions of opposites make the sentence above easier to remember than if it merely stated that “the patent system rewards action.”