民法解釋選擇問題的分析框架──以或有期間概念為分析範例

民法解釋選擇問題，是關於如何對民法學範疇內的事實判斷和價值判斷結論進行理解和表達的問題。其既不同於事實判斷和價值判斷本身，也不同於法律解釋學。將解釋選擇作為一種獨立問題類型的思維方式已在相當範圍內得到運用，但其分析方法卻未得到應有關注。對解釋選擇問題的分析須從識別物件、理解物件以及對理解的表達三個環節依次展開，其中任何一個環節存在分歧，均可能導致最終結論的差異。建構民法解釋選擇問題的分析框架，一方面可為不同的解釋路徑提供相對客觀、理性的評判標準；另一方面也為前見各異的討論者提供了可進行有效交流的平臺。

In civil-law jurisdictions, like China, it is vitally important to distinguish determining facts and making value judgement from framing and phrasing the conclusions of fact determination and value judgement. Legal academics in China have been widely aware of the importance of such a distinction. Nonetheless, existing literature has not paid adequate attention to the analytical methods of legal-doctrine framing and wording. This paper advances a three-step analytical framework: the identification of the issue, the apprehension of the issue and the expression of the apprehension. Different framing and wording choices in each of the three steps may lead to different conclusion. However, a shared analytical framework serves to, on the one hand, provide criteria to evaluate the soundness of different framing and wording choices, and on the other hand, to promote mutual understandings among academics with different framing and wording preferences. To illustrate the analytical framework, this paper takes the issue of whether the Civil Code of China shall adopt the concept of Contingent Period as an example.