| 英文摘要 |
Constitutional Review endows the explanation of the Constitution with high authority. The establishment of authority could be constructed from three perspectives: the system, the organization and the procedure. This article aims to examine the characteristic of the reasoning behind the Constitutional Review judgements and rulings with the viewpoint of verbal communication. The author chooses to operate this research from a metastandpoint, using Syntax, Semantic and Pragmatics to analyze the meaning of “culture” between the interpreter and the parties and its relations and taking the judgements and rulings of the Federal Constitutional Court of Germany as the basis to analyze and compare. The author would choose related judgements and rulings to summarize the case facts and the discourse of cultural statements in order to analyze how cultural concepts apply to the practices of the Federal Constitutional Court, explain the characteristic of functional use and the contrasting results in reality. After discussing the cases of the Federal Constitutional Court of Germany, the author would present the point that the use of language and vocabulary would reflect the existence of the above and its necessity from a hermeneutical way, then inquire the phenomena of pragmatic ambiguity from the prospective of grammar and correlation, and discuss culture as verbal symbol by the research result of linguistics. The above works could be helpful to explain that the purpose of interpretation is to gain the persuasion of the parties to the litigation, and to demonstrate the meaning and the value of this usage with mediating concepts from disorganized cases. At the conclusion of this article the author would illuminate the relation between Constitutional Review and deliberative democracy.
|
