Metaphors in Arbitral Awards
A Corpus-assisted Discourse Analysis across Legal Traditions
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.13136/2281-4582/2025.i25.1596Parole chiave:
Metaphor, Arbitration, Arbitral awards, Civil law, Common lawAbstract
This article investigates the use of metaphors in arbitral awards, examining how these figurative expressions become embedded in legal reasoning and shape decision-making. Drawing on the pervasive role of metaphors in everyday language (Lakoff and Johnson 1980, 3; Semino 2008, 1) and legal discourse (Winter 1989, 1222), the study acknowledges the influence of legal traditions on linguistic choices in arbitration texts (Gotti 2008, 232). It situates its analysis within the broader framework of genre theory, emphasizing the intrinsic link between legal discourse and its institutional and professional contexts (Bhatia, Garzone and Degano 2012, 1; Fairclough and Wodak 1997, 276).
Using a corpus-assisted discourse study (CADS) (Partington, Duguid and Taylor 2013, 10; Goźdź-Roszkowski 2021, 1517), this research employs quantitative and qualitative methods to analyze arbitral awards drafted in English and sourced from the Jus Mundi database. The corpus, covering awards rendered between 2008 and 2023, is divided into two subcorpora reflecting the legal systems governing the arbitration: one consisting of awards governed by the laws of civil law countries (Italy, France, Switzerland) and the other by the laws of common law countries (UK, US, Hong Kong, Singapore).
The study identifies key conceptual metaphors and examines how their usage reflects and reinforces the distinct legal cultures of civil law and common law systems. Findings reveal differences in metaphorical framing of legal principles and procedures, highlighting the nuanced interplay between metaphor and legal culture. By exploring how metaphors shape the discourse and interpretation of arbitration procedures, this research contributes to a deeper understanding of the intersection between legal language and cultural traditions.
Riferimenti bibliografici
Berger, Linda L. “Of Metaphor, Metonymy, and Corporate Money: Rhetorical Choices in Supreme Court Decisions on Campaign Finance Regulation.” Mercer Law Review 58.3 (2007): 949-990.
Bhatia, Vijay K. “Accessibility of Discoursal Data in Critical Genre Analysis: International Commercial Arbitration Practice.” Linguagem em (Dis) curso 10 (2010): 465-483.
---. Analysing Genre: Language Use in Professional Settings. London: Longman, 1993.
Bhatia, Vijay K. and Jane Lung. “Analysing International Commercial Arbitration Awards as Genre.” Arbitration Awards: Generic Features and Textual Realisations. Edited by Vijay K. Bhatia, Giuliana Garzone and Chiara Degano. Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2012. 21-46.
Bhatia, Vijay K., Giuliana Garzone and Chiara Degano. “Arbitration Awards: Generic Features and Textual Realisations. An Introduction.” Arbitration Awards: Generic Features and Textual Realisations. Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2012. 1-12.
Biel, Lucja. Lost in the Eurofog: The Textual Fit of Translated Law. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 2014.
Black, Max. Models and Metaphors: Studies in Language and Philosophy. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1962.
Born, Gary B. International Commercial Arbitration. Alphen aan den Rijn: Kluwer Law International, 2021.
---. International Commercial Arbitration: Commentary and Materials. The Hague: Kluwer Law International, 2001.
Bozovic, Petar. “Metaphors We Judge By: A Corpus-Based Study of Metaphor Use in English Legal Discourse.” Revista Signos. Estudios de Lingüística 57.115 (2024): 402-425.
Brezina, Vaclav. Statistics in Corpus Linguistics: A Practical Guide. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2018.
Caballero, Rosario. “Genre and Metaphor: Use and Variation Across Usage Events.” The Routledge Handbook of Metaphor and Language. Edited by Elena Semino and Zsófia Demjén. London: Routledge, 2017. 193-205.
Cameron, Lynne and Robert Maslen. Metaphor Analysis: Research Practice in Applied Linguistics, Social Sciences and the Humanities. London: Equinox, 2010.
Cappelletti, Mauro. “The Doctrine of Stare Decisis and the Civil Law: A Fundamental Difference – or No Difference at All?” Festschrift für Konrad Zweigert zum 70. Geburtstag. Edited by Herbert Bernstein, Ulrich Drobnig and Hein Kötz. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1981. 381-393.
Chiu, Sheng-hsiu and Wen-yu Chang. “FIGHT Metaphors in Legal Discourse: What is Unsaid in the Story?” Language and Linguistics 12.4 (2011): 877-915.
Chroma, Martha. “Cross-Cultural Traps in Legal Translation.” Intercultural Aspects of Specialized Communication, Linguistic Insights Series. Edited by Christopher N. Candlin and Maurizio Gotti. Bern: Peter Lang, 2007. 197-222.
Cloutier, Étienne. “A Tale of Two Metaphors: A Narrative Take on the Canadian Constitution.” McGill Law Journal 64.3 (2019): 447-498.
Cordero-Moss, Giuditta. “The Role of the Lex Arbitri.” The Cambridge Companion to International Arbitration. Edited by Chin L. Lim. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2021. 97-114.
Criscuoli, Giovanni and Mario Serio. Nuova introduzione allo studio del diritto inglese. Le fonti. Milano: Giuffrè Editore, 2016.
Culley, Andrew and Michael Salter. “Why Study Metaphors.” King’s College Law Journal 15.2 (2004): 347-366.
Demjén, Zsófia and Elena Semino. “Introduction: Metaphor and Language.” The Routledge Handbook of Metaphor and Language. London: Routledge, 2017. 1-10.
Fairclough, Norman and Ruth Wodak. “Critical Discourse Analysis.” Discourse as Social Interaction: Discourse Studies 2 (A Multidisciplinary Introduction). Edited by Teun A. Van Dijk. London: Sage, 1997. 258-284.
Fischer-Lescano, Andreas. “Nature as a Legal Person: Proxy Constellations in Law.” Law & Literature 32.2 (2020): 237-262.
Frade, Celina. “Systems of Genres in International Commercial Arbitration.” Discourse and Practice in International Commercial Arbitration: Issues, Challenges and Prospects. Edited by Vijay K. Bhatia, Christopher Candlin and Maurizio Gotti. Farnham: Ashgate, 2012. 45-62.
Garzone, Giuliana and Rita Salvi. Legal English. Milano: Egea, 2007.
Glendon, Mary Ann, Paolo G. Carozza and Colin B. Picker. Comparative Legal Traditions in a Nutshell. St. Paul: West Academic Publishing, 2016.
Goźdź-Roszkowski, Stanisław. “Corpus Linguistics in Legal Discourse.” International Journal for the Semiotics of Law/Revue internationale de Sémiotique juridique 34.5 (2021): 1515-1540.
Gotti, Maurizio. “Cultural Constraints on Arbitration Discourse.” Legal Discourse across Cultures and Systems. Edited by Vijay K. Bhatia, Christopher Candlin and Jan Engberg. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press, 2008. 221-252.
Hafner, Christoph A. “Professional Reasoning, Legal Cultures, and Arbitral Awards.” World Englishes 30.1 (2011): 117-128.
Joo, Thomas W. “Contract, Property and the Role of Metaphor in Corporations Law.” UC Davis Law Review 35.779 (2001): 1-59.
Jus Mundi. “General Terms of Sale and Subscription.” https://jusmundi.com/cgu/terms_of_subscription_en.pdf. Last visited 18/11/2024.
Kauffmann, Philipp. “Spreading the Law – Comparative Legal Traditions.” Journal on European History of Law 4.2 (2013): 33-40.
Klinck, Dennis. The Word of the Law: Approaches to Legal Discourse. Ottawa: Carleton University Press, 1991.
Kordic, Ljubica. “Metaphors Lawyers Live By.” International Journal for the Semiotics of Law 36.4 (2023): 1639-1654.
Lakoff, George and Mark Johnson. Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: Chicago University Press, 1980.
Landau, Mark J., Daniel Sullivan and Jeff Greenberg. “Evidence That Self-Relevant Motives and Metaphoric Framing Interact to Influence Political and Social Attitudes.” Psychological Science 20.11 (2009): 1421-1427.
Leech, Geoffrey. “New Resources, or Just Better Old Ones?: The Holy Grail of Representativeness.” Corpus Linguistics and the Web. Edited by Marianne Hundt, Nadja Nesselhauf and Carolin Biewer. Amsterdam: Rodopi, 2007. 133-149.
Mancuso, Salvatore. “Language, Law and Food.” DPCE Online 59.2 (2023): 2155-2166.
Mattei, Ugo and Pier Giuseppe Monateri. Introduzione breve al diritto comparato. Padova: Cedam, 1997.
Mattei, Ugo and Luca G. Pes. “Civil Law and Common Law: Toward Convergence?” The Oxford Handbook of Law and Politics. Edited by Gregory A. Caldeira, R. Daniel Kelemen and Keith E. Whittington. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008. 267-280.
McEnery, Tony, Richard Xiao and Yukio Tono. Corpus-Based Language Studies: An Advanced Resource Book. London: Routledge, 2006.
McEnery, Tony and Andrew Hardie. Corpus Linguistics: Method, Theory and Practice. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2012.
Morra, Lucia, Piercarlo Rossi and Carla Bazzanella. “Metaphor in Language: Clarity or Obscurity?” Legal Language and the Search for Clarity – Practice and Tools. Edited by Anne Wagner and Sophie Caccia Guidi-Fahi. Bern: Peter Lang, 2006. 141-174.
Moses, Margaret L. The Principles and Practice of International Commercial Arbitration. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2017.
Mourre, Alexis and Alexandre Vagenheim. “Again on the Case for the Publication of Arbitral Awards.” Arbitration International 39.2 (2023): 259-267.
Oxford English Dictionary (OED). https://www.oed.com/. Last visited 30/11/2024.
Partington, Alan, Alison Duguid and Charlotte Taylor. Patterns and Meanings in Discourse: Theory and Practice in Corpus-Assisted Discourse Studies (CADS). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 2013.
Pejovic, Caslav. “Civil Law and Common Law: Two Different Paths Leading to the Same Goal.” Poredbeno Pomorsko Pravo 155 (2001): 7-32.
Philip, Gill. “Conventional and Novel Metaphors in Language.” The Routledge Handbook of Metaphor and Language. Edited by Elena Semino and Zsófia Demjén. London: Routledge, 2017. 219-232.
Pragglejaz Group. “MIP: A Method for Identifying Metaphorically Used Words in Discourse.” Metaphor and Symbol 22.1 (2007): 1-39.
Related Words. Find Words Related to Another Word. https://www.relatedwords.org. Last visited 30/11/2024.
Reiss, Katharina and Hans Vermeer. Towards a General Theory of Translational Action. Skopos Theory Explained. London: Routledge, 2013.
Resnik, Judith, Stephanie Garlock and Annie J. Wang. “Collective Preclusion and Inaccessible Arbitration: Data, Non-Disclosure, and Public Knowledge.” Lewis & Clark Law Review 24.2 (2020): 611-684.
Richard, Isabelle. “Metaphors in English for Law: Let Us Keep Them!” Lexis: Journal in English Lexicology 8 (2014): 1-19.
Sacco, Rodolfo. “Legal Formants: A Dynamic Approach to Comparative Law (Installment I of II).” The American Journal of Comparative Law 39.1 (1991): 1-34.
Šarčević, Susan. New Approach to Legal Translation. The Hague: Kluwer Law International, 1997.
Schlesinger, Rudolph B. Comparative Law: Cases, Texts, Materials. New York: Foundation Press, 1998.
Semino, Elena. Metaphor in Discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008.
Siems, Mathias. Comparative Law. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2018.
Sketch Engine. https://www.sketchengine.eu. Last visited 30/11/2024.
Smith, Michael R. “Levels of Metaphor in Persuasive Legal Writing.” Mercer Law Review 58.3 (2007): 919-948.
Steen, Gerard J., et al. A Method for Linguistic Metaphor Identification: From MIP to MIPVU. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2010.
Susan, Binsy and Amogh Srivastava. “Publication of Arbitral Awards: Balancing Confidentiality and Transparency in Arbitration.” Indian Arbitration Law Review 4 (2022): 13-27.
Swales, John M. Genre Analysis: English in Academic and Research Settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990.
Tognini-Bonelli, Elena. Corpus Linguistics at Work. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2001.
Webster, Thomas H. and Michael W. Bühler. Handbook of ICC Arbitration: Commentary, Precedents, Materials. London: Sweet & Maxwell, 2014.
Wicke, Philipp and Marianna M. Bolognesi. “Framing COVID-19: How We Conceptualize and Discuss the Pandemic on Twitter.” Plos One 15.9 (2020): 1-24.
Winter, Steven L. “Transcendental Nonsense, Metaphoric Reasoning, and the Cognitive Stakes for Law.” University of Pennsylvania Law Review 137.4 (1989): 1107-1237.
Dowloads
Pubblicato
Fascicolo
Sezione
Licenza
Copyright (c) 2025 Ornella Guarino
Questo volume è pubblicato con la licenza Creative Commons Attribuzione 4.0 Internazionale.
Iperstoria è una rivista accademica ad accesso libero.
a. Gli autori e le autrici detengono il copyright e danno alla rivista il diritto per la prima pubblicazione con il contributo sotto licenza Creative Commons BY (4.0) che permette di condividere l’articolo con il riconoscimento della prima pubblicazione su questa rivista.
b. Gli autori e le autrici possono inoltre stabilire ulteriori direttive contrattuali per la distribuzione non esclusiva della versione del contributo pubblicata sulla rivista (es. ripubblicarlo in archivi istituzionali o in un volume), con uno specifico riconoscimento della prima pubblicazione su questa rivista. Chiediamo pertanto agli autori e autrici di contattarci nel caso di eventuali ripubblicazioni.
