Rationaler og potentialer i moderne retsretorik: En kortlægning af feltet
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.52610/rhs.v21i75.56Nyckelord:
rhetoric and lawAbstract
Relationen mellem retorik og jura er lige så gammel som fagene selv. Retorisk uddannelse og teoribygning knyttede sig i antikken tæt til praksis inden for den forensiske retorik. Dykker man ned i den moderne retsretoriske litteratur erfarer man dog hurtigt, at retsretorik i dag er andet og mere end (effektiv) retorik i retten. De to fag, retorik og jura, sammentænkes på en række forskellige måder og gør retsretorik til en mangefacetteret disciplin. Med afsæt i centrale retsretoriske bidrag argumenteres for, at det retsretoriske felt kan inddeles i tre overordnede forståelsesrammer: Retsretorik qua praktisk kommunikation (i retten), retsretorik qua metodiske og didaktiske overvejelser (på jurastudiet), og retsretorik qua diskussioner af (rets)filosofisk karakter.
Referenser
Anapol, Malthon. ”Rhetoric and Law: An Overview.” Today´s Speech 18 (1970), 12-20.
Aristoteles. Retorik. København: Museum Tusculanum, 1996.
Balkin, J.M. “The Crystalline Structure of Legal Thought.” Rutgers Law Review 39 (1986): 1-103.
Balkin, J.M. ”A Night in the Topics: The Reason of Legal Rhetoric and the Rhetoric of Legal Reason.” I Law’s Stories. Narrative and Rhetoric in the Law, red. Peter Brooks og Poul Gewirtz, 211-24. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1996.
Ballweg, Ottmar. ”Analytical Rhetoric, Semiotic and the Law.” I Law and Semiotics, red. Roberta Kevelson, 25-33. New York: Plenum Press, 1987.
Berger, Linda L. ”Applying New Rhetoric to Legal Discourse: The Ebb and Flow of Reader and Writer, Text and Context.” Journal of Legal Education 155 (1999): 155-184.
Beyer, Janus. Retorik i retten. Bedre forelæggelse, afhøring og procedure. København: Hans Reitzels Forlag, 2013.
Billig, Michael. ”Psychology, Rhetoric, and Cognition.” History of the Human Sciences 2 (1989): 289-307.
Blandhol, Sverre. ”Den nordiske rettsvitenskapens retoriske grunnlag.” Rhetorica Scandinavica 33 (2005): 17-32.
Blumenfeld, Barbara P. “Rhetoric, Referential Communication, and the Novice Writer.” Legal Communication & Rhetoric: JALWD 9 (2012): 207-227.
Charland, Maurice. ”Constitutive Rhetoric: The Case of the Peuple Québécois.” The Quarterly Journal of Speech 73 (1987): 133-150.
Charland, Maurice. ”Constitutive Rhetoric.” I Encyclopedia of Rhetoric, red. Thomas O. Sloane, 616-19. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001.
Cicero, M. Tullius. Brutus. I Retoriske Skrifter II & III. Red. Mogens Leisner-Jensen, Thure Hastrup og Jacob Isager. Odense: Syddansk Universitetsforlag, 2003.
Cicero, M. Tullius. Orator. I Retoriske Skrifter II & III. Red. Mogens Leisner-Jensen, Thure Hastrup og Jacob Isager. Odense: Syddansk Universitetsforlag, 2003.
Cicero, M. Tullius. Topica. Overs. H.M. Hubble. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1949.
Corbett, Edward P.J. & Robert J. Connors. Classical Rhetoric for the Modern Student. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999.
Crook, J.A. Legal Advocacy in the Roman World. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2005.
Durham, Jr., W.C. ”Translator’s Foreword.” I Theodor Viehweg, Topics and Law. A Contribution to Basic Research in Law, overs. J.C. Durham, Jr., xi-xxxv. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 1993.
Frost, Michael H. Introduction to Classical Legal Rhetoric: A Lost Heritage. Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2005.
Gabrielsen, Jonas. Topik: Ekskursioner i retorikkens toposlære. Åstorp: Retorikforlaget, 2008.
Gabrielsen, Jonas & Inger Høedt-Rasmussen. Juridisk gennemslagskraft. København: Jurist- og Økonomforbundets Forlag, 2012.
Gabrielsen, Jonas & Sabine Aae. ”Bliver man en klog jurist af retorik?” RetorikMagasinet 98 (2015): 15-17.
Gabrielsen, Jonas. ”Jura og retorik – et mangfoldigt møde.” I Retten i sproget: Samspillet mellem ret og sprog i juridisk praksis, red. Anne Lise Kjær, Lin Adrian, Cecilie Brito Cederstrøm, Jan Engberg, Jonas Gabrielsen, Morten Rosenmeier og Sten Schaumburg-Müller, 97-112. København: Jurist og Økonomforbundets Forlag, 2015.
Gabrielsen, Jonas & Sten Schaumburg-Müller. ”Introduktion til sektion II: Hvordan overbeviser man med sprog? Retsretorik og juridisk argumentation – fra fordomme til videndeling.” I Retten i sproget: Samspillet mellem ret og sprog i juridisk praksis, red. Anne Lise Kjær, Lin Adrian, Cecilie Brito Cederstrøm, Jan Engberg, Jonas Gabrielsen, Morten Rosenmeier og Sten Schaumburg-Müller, 91-95. København: Jurist og Økonomforbundets Forlag, 2015.
Gaonkar, Dilip Parameshwar. ”Contingency and Probability.” I Encyclopedia of Rhetoric, red. Thomas O. Sloane, 151-166. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001.
Goodrich, Peter. ”Rhetoric as Jurisprudence: An Introduction to the Politics of Legal Language.” Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 4 (1984): 88-122.
Goodrich, Peter. ”Law.” I Encyclopedia of Rhetoric, red. Thomas O. Sloane, 417-426. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001.
Graver, Hans Petter. Rettsretorikk – En metodelære. Bergen: Fagbokforlaget, 2007.
Graver, Hans Petter. Juridisk overtalelseskunst. Bergen: Fagbokforlaget, 2008.
Graver, Hans Petter. Rett, retorikk og jurdidisk argumentasjon. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget, 2010.
Hanley, Robert F. ”Brush Up Your Aristotle.” Journal of the Association of Legal Writing Directors 3 (2006): 145-153.
Hinks, D.A.G. ”Tisias and Corax and the Invention of Rhetoric.” The Classical Quarterly 34 (1940): 61-69.
Hjort, J.B. Prosedyreteknikk. Oslo: Forlag 1, 2011.
Hollander, John. ”Legal Rhetoric.” I Law’s Stories. Narrative and Rhetoric in the Law, red. Peter Brooks og Poul Gewirtz, 176-86. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1996.
Holmberg, Carl B. ”The Pedagogy of Invention as the Architectonic Production of Communication and of Humanness.” Communication Education 30 (1981): 229-237.
Isokrates. ”Om formuebytning (Antidosis).” I Isokrates: Fire taler, overs. Thure Hastrup, 97-102. København: Museum Tusculanum, 1986.
Kahn, Victoria. ”Rhetoric and the Law.” Diacritics 19 (1989): 21-34.
Keating, Karl. ”Winning with Aristotle: The Four Kinds of Arguments.” California State Bar journal 52 (1977): 308-312.
Kennedy, George. The Art of Persuasion in Greece. Princeton: Princeton UP, 1963.
Kennedy, George. The Art of Rhetoric in the Roman World. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1972.
Könczöl, Miklós. “What There is Left and How It Works: Ancient Rhetoric and the Semiotics of Law.” International Journal of the Semiotic of Law 22 (2009): 399–410.
Levine, Linda J. & Kurt M. Saunders. “Thinking Like a Rhetor.” Journal of Legal Education 43 (1993): 108-122.
McKeon, Richard. ”The Uses of Rhetoric in a Technological Age: Architectonic Productive Arts.” I Richard McKeon, Rhetoric: Essays in Invention & Discovery, red. Mark Backman, 1-24. Woodbridge, CT: Ox Bow Press, 1987.
Perelman, Ch. “The Specific Nature of Juridical Proofs.” I The Idea of Justice and Problem of Argument, red. John Petrie, 98-108. London and Henley: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1963.
Perelman, Ch. & Olbrechts-Tyteca, L. The New Rhetoric – A Treatise on Argumentation. Overs. John Wilkinson & Purcell Weaver. Notre Dame, IN: Univ. of Notre Dame Press, 1971.
Phelps, Teresa Godwin. ”The New Legal Rhetoric.” Southwestern Law Journal 40 (1996): 1089-1102.
Quintilian, Marcus Fabius. Institutio Oratoria. Red. og overs. Donald A. Russell. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1969.
Rieke, Richard D. ”The Rhetoric of Law – a Bibliographical Essay.” Today’s Speech 18 (1970): 48-57.
Robbins-Tiscione, Kristen Konrad. Rhetoric for Legal Writers. The Theory and Practice of Analysis and Persuasion. St. Paul, MN: Thomson Reuters, 2009.
Rosenmeier, Lene. ”Tema: Retorik i retten. Den gode proces.” Advokaten 9 (2013), 8-13.
Saunders Kurt M. ”Law as Rhetoric, Rhetoric as Argument.” Journal of the Association of Legal Writing Directors 3 (2006): 164-176.
Sobota, Katharina. ”System and Flexibility in Law.” Argumentation 5 (1981): 255-282.
Sobota, Katharina. ”The Rhetorical Construction of Law.” International Journal for the Semiotics of Law 13 (1992): 39-54.
Somby, Ánde. Juss som retorikk. Norge: Tano Aschehoug, 1999.
Schaumburg-Müller, Sten. ”Law as a Tale of Identity: Some Perspectives on Human Rights Law.” I Law and Literature: Interdisciplinary Methods of Reading, red. Karen Margrethe Simonsen og Ditlev Tamm, 67-77. København: Jurist- og Økonomforbundets Forlag, 2010.
Schaumburg-Müller, Sten. ”Hvorfor er retorik ikke slået igennem inden for dansk juridisk tradition?” I Retten i sproget: Samspillet mellem ret og sprog i juridisk praksis, .red. Anne Lise Kjær, Lin Adrian, Cecilie Brito Cederstrøm, Jan Engberg, Jonas Gabrielsen, Morten Rosenmeier og Sten Schaumburg-Müller, 155-171. København: Jurist og Økonomforbundets Forlag, 2015.
Sprague, Rosamond Kent. The Older Sophists: A Complete Translation by Several Hands of the Fragments in Die Fragmente der Vorsokratiker. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company, Inc., 2001.
Staffe, Maria Louise. Winning with Words. Rhetoric. The art of Convincing in a Court of Law. Washington: Washington House, 2002.
Staffe, Maria Louise. ”Retskildelære og topik.” Rhetorica Scandinavica, 33 (2005): 46-55.
Stoeckli, Walter A. ”Topic and Argumentation: The Contribution of Viehweg and Perelman in the Field of Methodology as Applied to Law.” Archives for Philosophy of Law and Social Philosophy 54 (1968): 581-591.
Tellegen, J. W., & Tellegen-Couperus, O. E. ”Artes Urbanae. Roman Law and Rhetoric.” I New Frontiers: Law and Society in the Roman World, red. P. J. du Plessis, 31-50. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2013.
Tiersma, Peter M. ”What is Language and Law? And does anyone care?” Loyola-LA Legal Studies Paper (2009).
Trachtman, Joel. P. The Tools of Argument. How the Best Lawyers Think, Argue, and Win. CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform, 2013.
Viehweg, Theodore. Topics and Law. A Contribution to Basic Research in Law. Overs. W.C. Durham, Jr. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 1993.
Weiss, Franklin R. ”How the Lawyer Uses Rhetoric.” Today´s Speech 7 (1959): 6-15.
White, James Boyd. Heracles’ Bow: Essays on the Rhetoric and Poetics of the Law. Madison, WI: The University of Wisconsin Press, 1985.
White, James Boyd. ”Law as Rhetoric, Rhetoric as Law: The Arts of Cultural and Communal Life.” The University of Chicago Law Review 52 (1985): 684-702.
##submission.downloads##
Publicerad
Referera så här
Nummer
Sektion
Licens
Detta verk är licensierat under en Creative Commons Erkännande-Ickekommersiell-IngaBearbetningar 4.0 Internationell-licens.
Open Access; CC Erkännande-IckeKommersiell-IngaBearbetningar 4.0
