Abstract
Legal discourse unfolds with the authority to control the behavior of the members of community regarding the topic of the discourse called law. This master discourse consists of a complex system of signs, functioning through self-reference of the system’s signs. Such a system operates autonomously of the environment within which it functions, as the thesis of law-as-autopoiesis shows (Luhmann, Teubner). That position forms an interesting contrast with positions of Hart or Dworkin. However, law observes and responds to its environment, which consists of the community’s political morality, because although the system functions autonomously, the system’s existence depends upon legitimacy bestowed by the community. This legitimacy is granted while the system mirrors the political morality. Semiotics allows for the study of these evolving signs of which the law is composed, as well as the ways in which the legal system utilizes these signs as the system autopoietically perpetuates.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Broekman, Jan M. 2009a. Law in life, life in law: Llewellyn’s legal realism revisted. In: On philosophy in American law, ed. Francis J. Mootz III. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Broekman, Jan M. 2009b. On law and semiotics. Course Book unpublished manuscript for Law and Semiotics Seminar at The Dickinson School of Law, Penn State University.
Dworkin, Ronald. 1986. Law’s empire. Harvard UP.
Estin v. Estin 334 U.S. 541. (1948).
Ewick, Patricia, and Susan S. Silbey. 1999. Common knowledge and ideological critique: The significance of knowing that the “haves” come out ahead. Law and Society Review 33: 1025.
Fuller, L. L. 2008. Human interaction and the law. Reprinted in [8] Lloyd’s introduction to jurisprudence, ed. M.D.A. Freeman, 1115. Thomson Reuters (Legal) Limited.
Hart, H.L.A. 1997. The concept of law. New York: Oxford University Press.
Hershovitz, Scott. 2003. Legitimacy, democracy, and Razian authority. Legal Theory 9: 201.
Jackson, Bernard S. 1985. Semiotics and legal theory. Merseyside: Deborah Charles Publications.
Kevelson, R. 1999a. Peirce and the mark of the Gryphon. Basingstoke: Macmillian.
Kevelson, Roberta. 1999b. Semiotic philosophy of law. In The philosophy of law: An encyclopedia, ed. Christopher Berry Gray. New York/London: Garland Publishing.
Lamond, Grant. 2001. Coercion and the nature of law. Legal Theory 7: 35.
Llewellyn, K. 1933–4. On philosophy in American law. 82 U. Pa. L. Rev. 205.
Llewellyn, K. 1994. The normative, the legal and the law-jobs: The problem of juristic method. Reprinted in [8]: Lloyd’s introduction to jurisprudence, ed. M.D.A. Freeman, p. 709. Thomson Reuters (Legal) Limited.
Llewellyn, K. 2008. The common law tradition . Reprinted in [8]: Lloyd’s introduction to jurisprudence, ed. M.D.A. Freeman, p. 1023. Thomson Reuters (Legal) Limited.
Luhmann, Niklas. 1988. The unity of the legal system. In: Autopoietic law: A new approach to law and society, ed. Gunther Teubner, 20. Berlin: Walter De Gruyter.
MacCormick, Neil. 1996–1997. Institutional normative order: A conception of law. Cornell Law Review 82: 1051.
Mondak, J.J. 1990. Perceived legitimacy of supreme court decisions: Three functions of source credibility. Political Behavior 12: 363.
Peirce, Charles Sanders. 1931. Collected papers of Charles Sanders Peirce, ed. Charles Hartshorne and Paul Weiss. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
People v. Dietze, 75 N.Y.2d 47 (Court of Appeals 1989).
Planned Parenthood v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833, 865–6 (1992).
Raz, Joseph. 2005. The problem of authority: Revisiting the service conception. Minnesota Law Review 90: 1003.
Teubner, Gunther. 1993. Law as an autopoietic system. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.
United States v. Lee, 106 U.S. 196, 233. (1882).
Von Savigny, F. K. 2008. System of modern Roman law. Reprinted in [8]: Lloyd’s introduction to jurisprudence, ed. M.D.A. Freeman, 1097. Thomson Reuters (Legal) Limited.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2011 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Ellsworth, J.A. (2011). Semiotics in Legal Theory Design. In: Broekman, J.M., Mootz, F.J. (eds) The Semiotics of Law in Legal Education. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-1341-3_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-1341-3_8
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-007-1340-6
Online ISBN: 978-94-007-1341-3
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawLaw and Criminology (R0)