This course applies the study of linguistics to the interpretation of modern and early modern laws and constitutions in English. We explore the challenges of analysing meaning in the law which arise as a result of changing standards, challenging political realities, and the evolution of language and society.

1 x 1hr lecture and 1 x 1hr seminar per week over 10 weeks as scheduled on MyCampus.

This is one of the Honours options in English Language and may not run every year. The options that are running this session are available on MyCampus.

None

The standard assessments for this course are: 

■ Portfolio of short exercises, including technical questions - 40% 

■ Statute law written assignment - 40% (word count not applicable) 

■ Reflective blog - 20% (word count to vary depending on assigned question) 

If required, for instance where a disability prevents a student from undertaking a specific method of assessment, the following alternatives are available: 

■ There are no alternatives to the assessments, but flexible deadlines can be offered as reasonable adjustment (Students should follow the usual process for extensions). 

Further reasonable adjustments may be provided where necessary. Students are encouraged to consult with the course convenor.  

This course will provide the opportunity to:

■ examine in detail major issues of legal interpretation from a linguistic perspective;

■ develop skills in arguing for and against a range of principles in the analysis of meaning in laws and constitutions;

■ apply linguistic knowledge to texts where the interpretation of meaning has significant real-world consequences.

By the end of this course students will be able to:

■ interpret the meaning of legislation and constitutions in English critically, drawing on different approaches to language and the law;

■ locate relevant legal sources and assess them critically in terms of their linguistic implications;

■ communicate, in writing, a linguistically-based interpretation of a selected controversial legal issue;

■ argue for the importance of linguistic semantics in codifying and understanding the law.