The Possibility of Universal Semiotics of Law

The universality of human language above the diversity of vernaculars as theorized by Noam Chomsky creates the temptation to adapt the same idea to law. There are parallels between language and law, e.g., Latin language and Roman law, the universality, formality, and generativity of the two and the embeddedness of law in language. Chomsky’s universal generative grammar is applicable to law in a direct way but the theory is still extendable to semantics and pragmatics of law. The claim is that generating constructions of elemental constituents is an approved technique of law and jurisprudence as much as of linguistics. The pragmatic dimension of semiotics of law shows the significant contribution of law to consolidating social role of speech acts.

On relationships between the logic of law, legal positivism and semiotics of law

The issue of reciprocal relationships between the logic of law, positivistic theory of the logic of law, and legal semiotics is among the most important questions of the modern theoretical jurisprudence. This paper has not attempted to provide any comprehensive account of the modern jurisprudence (and legal logic). Instead, the emphasis has been laid on those aspects of positivist legal theories, logical studies of law and legal semiotics that allow tracing the common points or the differences between these paradigms of legal research. One of the theses of the present work is that, at the comparative methodological level, the limits of legal semiotics and its object of inquiry could only be defined in relation to legal posi tivism and logical studies of law. This paper also argues for a proper position for legal semiotics in between legal positivism and legal logic. The differences between legal positivism, legal logic and legal semiotics are best captured in the issue of referent.