Otherness, elsewhere, and the 'Ecology' of law's implications: The semiotic oceans surrounding legal signification and its discriminatory exteriority/objectivity
-
Mario Ricca
Mario Ricca is full professor in Intercultural Law at University of Parma, Italy. He is managing director of the online journal
Calumet — Intercultural Law and Humanities Review . He has published several books on intercultural law. His research areas interplay among law, anthropology, semiotics, and geography. Among his latest publications: Planning Facts Through Law: Legal Reasonableness as Creative Indexicality and Trans-categorical Re-configuration.Int J Semiot Law (2020).https://doi.org/10.1007/s11196-020-09702-z ; Perpetually Astride Eden’s Boundaries: The Limits to the ‘Limits of Law’ and the Semiotic Inconsistency of ‘Legal Enclosures’.Int J Semiot Law (2020).https://doi.org/10.1007/s11196-020-09771-0 ; Don’t Uncover that Face! Covid-19 Masks and the Niqab: Ironic Transfigurations of the ECtHR’s Intercultural Blindness.Int J Semiot Law (2020).https://doi.org/10.1007/s11196-020-09703-y ; Ubiquitous Sacred Places. The Planetary Interplay of Their Meaning and Legal Protection in Naming the Sacred: Religious Toponimy in History, Theology and Politics, (Eds.) A. Mambelli and V. Marchetto. Göttingen. V&R (2019).
Abstract
Modern legal systems’ efficacy and self-consistency rely upon semantic/cultural conditions that they do not engender and are unable to maintain without resorting to the cognitive provisions gushing out from freedom—this is the preliminary assumption of this essay. Some factors play a generative role in this direction. The cornerstone of legal modernity is the ‘exteriority’ of law. This means that legal qualifications have to draw from the morphological appearances of human behaviors and relate to only their empirical/factual signification and consequences. The domain of intentions, the internal forum, is out of law’s cognitive reach. The whole grammar of modern liberties is somehow imbued with the idea that freedom can exist only insofar as a ‘zone’ of behavioral autonomy is granted by means of objectively determined rights and duties. The formal features of these rights and their pragmatic implications cannot therefore be opined just because their exterior significance allegedly assures a shelter for individual freedom. In a sense, freedom is considered as an epiphenomenon of the protection afforded by the past reification of rights. The ensuing silent assumption is that should freedom redefine the content and the objective behavioral implementations of those rights, it would annihilate itself. What this approach overwrites, however, is that the morphological appearances of gestures and things stem from cultural and inter-subjective-discursive activities—a kind of semantic social contract—that can never be considered accomplished once and for all. This is because the very molding of the shapes and features of morphological appearances implies that freedom, viz. a non-indifferent differing is at work. But freedom, in turn, is a ‘phenomenon’ the origin of which dwells in the individuals’ internal forum, their own experiences, including their mnestic environment and the semiotic crossroads that constitute their minds. Nevertheless, legal terminological apparatuses—as shown above—are treated/used as systems of signs that encapsulate a semantic discontinuity in their legitimacy, a setback in the definition not only of what it is to be, but also the factual dimension to which legal categorizations implicitly refer. This discontinuity is often passed off as an objectivity normatively granted and absorbed by legal language that includes not only the meanings of what ‘ought to be’ but—silently—even of what ‘is.’ The exteriority of modern law and the objectivity of the related morphological assumption make up, therefore, the lexicon of ‘an’ equality somehow immunized against freedom and its semantic-political differentiating significance. The equality of differences before the law, but not inside the law, is the Kafkian liberticidal and mystifying outcome of the above Cartesian-fashioned misuse of law’s mythologized exteriority/objectivity and the epistemological sleight of hand for which such a binomial paves the way. The paper will analyze the extent to which the self-evidence bestowed upon morphological features encapsulated in official legal discourse epitomizes semiotic ideological assumptions and eases their instrumental/discriminatory use. Moreover, the normative and partisan misuses of the ‘cognitive’ will be explored to bring to the surface its function in the obscuring of the semio-ecological surroundings of human conduct and the resulting impairment of the relevance of ‘Otherness’ and ‘Elsewhere’ (including chronological remoteness) in the semantic construction of legal cases. Ultimately, the paper will examine how law’s exteriority—namely, an objective exteriority of facts and the related meanings under its lens—is often transformed into a (pseudo) cognitive instrument of power employed to deny freedom its constitutional-democratic role as an unremitting source of law.
About the author
Mario Ricca is full professor in Intercultural Law at University of Parma, Italy. He is managing director of the online journal Calumet — Intercultural Law and Humanities Review. He has published several books on intercultural law. His research areas interplay among law, anthropology, semiotics, and geography. Among his latest publications: Planning Facts Through Law: Legal Reasonableness as Creative Indexicality and Trans-categorical Re-configuration. Int J Semiot Law (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11196-020-09702-z; Perpetually Astride Eden’s Boundaries: The Limits to the ‘Limits of Law’ and the Semiotic Inconsistency of ‘Legal Enclosures’. Int J Semiot Law (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11196-020-09771-0 ; Don’t Uncover that Face! Covid-19 Masks and the Niqab: Ironic Transfigurations of the ECtHR’s Intercultural Blindness. Int J Semiot Law (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11196-020-09703-y ; Ubiquitous Sacred Places. The Planetary Interplay of Their Meaning and Legal Protection in Naming the Sacred: Religious Toponimy in History, Theology and Politics, (Eds.) A. Mambelli and V. Marchetto. Göttingen. V&R (2019).
References
Austin, John. 2002. Lectures on jurisprudence: Or the philosophy of positive law, vol. 1–2. (1869/1875). Clark, New Jersey: The Lawbook Exchange.Search in Google Scholar
Bachelard, Gaston. 2000. La formation de l’esprit scientifique. Contribution à une psychanalyse de la connaissance objective (1934). Nancy: Librairie Philosophique Vrin.Search in Google Scholar
Bachelard, Gaston. 2004. Le rationalisme appliqué (1949). Paris: PUF.Search in Google Scholar
Beccaria, Cesare. 2010. ‘On crimes and punishments’ and other writings (1764). Cambridge: CUP.Search in Google Scholar
Bentham, Jeremy. 1996. An introduction to the principles of morals and legislation (1789). Oxford: OUP.10.1093/oseo/instance.00077240Search in Google Scholar
Berlin, Isaiah. 2002. Liberty. Oxford: OUP.10.1093/019924989X.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Binder, Guyora. 2002. The rhetoric of motive and intent. Buffalo Criminal Law Review 6(1). 1.10.1525/nclr.2002.6.1.1Search in Google Scholar
Blumenberg, Hans. 1985. The legitimacy of the modern age. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.Search in Google Scholar
Blumenberg, Hans. 2007. Theorie der unbegrifflichkiet. Frankfurt a.M: Suhrkamp.Search in Google Scholar
Candeub, Adam. 1994. Motive crimes and other minds. University of Pennsylvania Law Review 142(6). 2071.10.2307/3312511Search in Google Scholar
Derrida, Jacques. 1981. Dissemination. London: The Athlone Press.10.7208/chicago/9780226816340.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Dewey, John. 1989. Freedom and culture. New York: Prometheus Books.Search in Google Scholar
Dewey, John. 2016. Democracy and education: An introduction to the philosophy of education. New York: The Free Press.Search in Google Scholar
Di Paolo, Ezequiel. 2020. Enactive becoming. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11097-019-09654-1 (accessed 15 February 2020).Search in Google Scholar
Di Paolo, Ezequiel, Elena C. Cuffaro & De Jaegher. Anne. 2018. Linguistic bodies: The continuity between life and language. Cambridge, MA London: The MIT Press.10.7551/mitpress/11244.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Dogliotti, Valerio. 2018. Conciliazione e mediazione nel diritto della Chiesa. Reviviscenza di una prassi storica. Rivista di Storia del Diritto Italiano XCI(1). 244.Search in Google Scholar
Durt, Christoph, Thomas Fuchs & Christian Tewe (eds.). 2017. Embodiment, enaction, and culture: Investigating the constitution of the shared world. Cambrdige, MA – London: MIT Press.10.7551/mitpress/9780262035552.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Eldar, Shachar & Elkana Laist. 2017. The irrelevance of motive and the rule of law. New Criminal Law Review 20(3): 433–464. https://doi.org/10.1525/nclr.2017.20.3.433.Search in Google Scholar
Feinberg, Joel. 1970. The expressive function of punishment. In Id., Doing and deserving, 95–118. Princeton: Princeton University Press.10.4324/9781315243290-1Search in Google Scholar
Gauchet, Marcel. 2005. Le désenchantement du monde. Une histoire politique de la religion. Paris: Gallimard.Search in Google Scholar
Gell, Alfred. 1998. Art and agency: An anthropological theory. Oxford: Clarendon Press.10.1093/oso/9780198280132.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Gert, Heather, Linda Radzik & Michael Hand. 2004. Hampton on the expressive power of punishment. Journal of Social Philosophy 35(1). 79.10.1111/j.1467-9833.2004.00217.xSearch in Google Scholar
Glenn, Patrick. 2014. Legal traditions of the world: Sustainable diversity in law. Oxford: OUP.10.1093/he/9780199669837.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Glüer, Kathrin & Åsa Wikfross. 2018. The normativity of meaning and content. In Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Available at: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/meaning-normativity/index.html#ref-2 (accessed 24 September 2019).Search in Google Scholar
Greimas, Algirdas J. 1983. Du Sens II – Essais sémiotiques, 103–113. Paris: Editions du Seuil.Search in Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen. 1998. Between facts and norms: Contributions to a discourse theory of law and democracy (1992). Cambridge: MIT Press.Search in Google Scholar
Hall, Jerome. 2005. General principles of criminal law. Lawbook Exchange (19602). New Jersey: Clark.Search in Google Scholar
Hampton, Jean. 1994. Liberalism, retribution and criminality. In Jules Coleman & A. Buchanan (eds.), Harm’s way: Essays in honor of Joel Feinberg, 159–82. New York: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Hampton, Jean. 1984. The moral education theory of punishment. Philosophy and Public Affairs,13: 208.Search in Google Scholar
Hampton, Jean. 1992a. An expressive theory of retribution. In W. Cragg (ed.), Retributivism and its critics, 1–25. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag.Search in Google Scholar
Hampton, Jean. 1992b. Correcting harms versus righting wrongs: The goal of retribution. UCLA Law Review 39. 1659.Search in Google Scholar
Hampton, Jean & Jeffire G. Murphy. 1988. Forgiveness and mercy. Cambridge: CUP.10.1017/CBO9780511625121Search in Google Scholar
Hart, Herbert L. A. 1994. The concept of law. Oxford: OUP.Search in Google Scholar
Hayek, Friedrich August. 1960. The constitution of liberty. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Search in Google Scholar
Hayek, Friedrich August 1967. The principles of a liberal social order. In Friedrich A. Hayek (ed.), Studies in philosophy, politics and economics, 160–177. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.10.7208/chicago/9780226321356.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Hegel, Georg W. F. 1991. Element of the philosophy of rights. Cambridge: CUP.10.1017/CBO9780511808012Search in Google Scholar
Heller, Hermann. 1983. Staatslehre (1934). Tübingen: Mohr.Search in Google Scholar
Heller, Hermann. 2009. Die souveränität. Ein beitrag zur theorie des staats- und völkerrechts (1927). Leipzig: Classic Edition.Search in Google Scholar
Hessick, Byrne. 2006. Motive’s role in criminal punishment. South California Law Review 80(1). 89.Search in Google Scholar
Holbraad, Martin, Amiria Henare & Sari Wastell 2007. Introduction: Thinking through things. In Ead (eds.), Thinking through things: Theorising artefacts ethnographically. London – New York: Routledge.10.4324/9780203088791Search in Google Scholar
Holmes, Oliver W. 1991. The common law (1881). New York: Dover.Search in Google Scholar
Honneth, Axel. 2014. Freedom’s right: The social foundations of democratic life, Kindle edition. Cambridge: Polity Press.10.7312/honn16246Search in Google Scholar
Horkheimer, Max & Theodor W. Adorno. 2002. Dialectic of enlightenment (1947). Stanford, CA. Stanford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Huigens, Kyron. 1995. Virtue and inculpation. Harvard Law Review 108(7). 423.10.2307/1341807Search in Google Scholar
Hunter-Henin, Myriam. 2020. Why religious freedom matters for democracy: Comparative reflections from Britain and France for a democratic “Vivre Ensemble”, Kindle edition. Oxford et al.: Hart.10.5040/9781509904778Search in Google Scholar
Husak, Douglas N. 1989. Motive and criminal liability. In Criminal justice ethics 8(1). 3–14.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199585038.003.0003Search in Google Scholar
Ingold, Tim. 2016. Evolution and social life. London - New York: Routledge.10.4324/9781315560397Search in Google Scholar
Ingold, Tim & Elizabeth Hallam. 2014. Making and growing: Anthropological studies of organisms and artefacts. London - New York: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar
Ingold, Tim. 2011. The perception of the environment: essays on livelihood, dwelling and skill. London - New York: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar
Ingold, Tim & Gisli Palsson. 2013. Biosocial becomings: Integrating social and biological anthropology. Cambridge: CUP.10.1017/CBO9781139198394Search in Google Scholar
Kahan, Dan M. & Martha C. Nussbaum. 1996. Two conceptions of emotion in criminal law. Columbia Law Review 96(2). 269.10.2307/1123166Search in Google Scholar
Kaufman, Whitley R. P. 2003. Motive, intention, and morality in the criminal law. Criminal Justice Review 28(2). 317.10.1177/073401680302800207Search in Google Scholar
Keane, Webb. 2018. On semiotic ideology. In Signs and society 6(1). 64.10.1086/695387Search in Google Scholar
Kelsen, Hans. 1949. General theory of law and the state. New Brunswick – London: Transaction Publishers.Search in Google Scholar
Kelsen, Hans. 2009. The pure theory of law (1960). Clark, New Jersey: The Lawbook Exchange Ltd.Search in Google Scholar
Kevelson, Roberta. 1993. Peirce’s esthetics of freedom: Possibility, complexity, and emergent value. New York et al.: Peter Lang.Search in Google Scholar
Lakatos, Imre. 1980. The methodology of scientific research programmes: Volume 1: Philosophical papers. Philosophical Papers, vol. I. Cambridge: CUP.Search in Google Scholar
Latour, Bruno. 2010. The modern cult of the factish gods. (Science and Cultural Theory). Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Latour, Bruno. 2015. We have never been modern (1991). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Marx, Karl. 1873. Political indifferentism. Available at: https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1873/01/indifferentism.htm (accessed 10 October 2020).Search in Google Scholar
Marx, Karl. 1887. Capital: A critique of political economy. Moscow: Progress Publishers. Available at: https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/download/pdf/Capital-Volume-I.pdf.Search in Google Scholar
Marx, Karl. 1993. Grundrisse (1857/58; 1939). New York: Penguin Books.Search in Google Scholar
Menski, Werner & Prakash Sha (eds.). 2008. Migration, diasporas and legal systems in Europe. New York: Routledge-Cavendish.Search in Google Scholar
Mertz, Elizabeth, William K. Ford & Gregory Matoesian (eds.). 2016. Translating the social world for law: Linguistic tools for a new legal realism, Kindle Edition. New York: OUP.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199990559.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Michaels, Alan C. 1998. The missing mental state. Southern California Law Review 71(5). 953.10.2139/ssrn.86088Search in Google Scholar
Modood, Tariq. 2019. Essays on secularism and multiculturalism, Kindle edition. London: ECPR Press/Rowman & Littlefield International.Search in Google Scholar
Petkoff, Peter. 2012. Forum internum and forum externum in Canon law and public international law with a particular reference to the jurisprudence of the European court of human rights. Religion and Human Rights 7(3). 183.10.1163/18710328-12341236Search in Google Scholar
Philippopoulos-Mihalopoulos, Andreas. 1999. The silence of the sirens environmental risk and the precautionary principle. Law and Critique 10. 175.10.1023/A:1008906011858Search in Google Scholar
Pifferi, Michele. 2016. Reinventing punishment: A comparative history of criminology and penology in the 19th and 20th century. Oxford: OUP.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198743217.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Pifferi, Michele. 2019. Problemi costituzionali del diritto penale tra riformismo e ascesa del paradigma autoritario (1920–1940). Quaderni Fiorentini per la Storia del Pensiero Giuridico Moderno 48. 310–343.Search in Google Scholar
Pillsbury, Samuel E. 1996. Crimes of indifference. Rutgers Law Review 49(1). 105.Search in Google Scholar
Räber, Michael I. 2020. Knowing democracy – A pragmatist account of the epistemic dimension in democratic politics. Cham, Switzerland: Springer.10.1007/978-3-030-53258-1Search in Google Scholar
Renteln, Alison D. 2004. The cultural defense. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oso/9780195154023.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Renteln, Alison D. 2010. Making room for culture in the court. 2010. The Judges Journal 49(2). 7–15.Search in Google Scholar
Renteln, Alison D. & Marie-Claire Foblets (eds.). 2009. Multicultural jurisprudence: Comparative perspectives on the cultural defense. Oxford: Bloomsbury.Search in Google Scholar
Ruda, Frank. 2011. Hegel’s rubble: An investigation into Hegel’s philosophy of right. London – New York: Continuum.Search in Google Scholar
Ricca, Mario. 2014. Intercultural law, interdisciplinary outlines, lawyering and anthropological expertise in migration cases: Before the courts. www.ec-aiss.itEC. Rivista dell’Associazione italiana di Studi semiotici, March 3.2014. (accessed 20 September 2019).Search in Google Scholar
Ricca, Mario. 2016a. The intercultural use of human rights and legal chorology. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2807424 or https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2807424 (accessed 14 Jan 2020).Search in Google Scholar
Ricca, Mario. 2016b. Klee’s cognitive legacy and human rights as intercultural transducers: Modern art, legal translation, and micro-spaces of coexistence. In Calumet – Intercultural law and humanities review, 1–40. Available at: http://www.windogem.it/calumet/upload/pdf2/mat_51.pdf (accessed 13 Jan 2020).Search in Google Scholar
Ricca, Mario. 2017. How to make law and space to interplay horizontally: From legal geography to legal chorology. Available at: SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2926651 (accessed 2 Mar 2017).10.2139/ssrn.2926651Search in Google Scholar
Ricca, Mario. 2018. Ignorantia facti excusat: Legal liability and the intercultural significance of Greimas’ “contrat de Véridition”. International Journal for the Semiotics of Law 31. 101. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11196-017-9529-6.Search in Google Scholar
Ricca, Mario. 2020a. Planning facts through law: Legal reasonableness as creative indexicality and trans-categorical Re-configuration. International Journal for the Semiotics of Law. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11196-020-09702-z.Search in Google Scholar
Ricca, Mario. 2020b. Perpetually Astride Eden’s boundaries: The limits to the ‘limits of law’ and the semiotic inconsistency of ‘legal enclosures’. International Journal for the Semiotics of Law. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11196-020-09771-0.Search in Google Scholar
Ricca, Mario & Tommaso Sbriccoli. 2016. Shylock del Bengala. Debiti migratori, vite in ostaggio e diritto d’asilo. (Un approccio corologico-interculturale alle implicazioni anti-umanitarie del patto commissorio). Calumet – Intercultural Law and Humanities Review 2. Available at: http://www.windogem.it/calumet/upload/pdf/mat_39.pdf.Search in Google Scholar
Robinson, Paul H. 1993. Should the criminal law abandon the actus reus-mens rea distinction? In S. Shute, et al. (eds.), Criminal law: Action, value and structure, 187–211. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198258063.003.0009Search in Google Scholar
Rosenberg, Michael T. 2008. The continued relevance of the irrelevance-of-motive maxim. Duke Law Journal 57(4). 1143.Search in Google Scholar
Simondon, Gilbert. 2020. Individuation in light of notions of form and information, vol. 1–2. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Search in Google Scholar
Simons, Kenneth. 1992. Rethinking mental states. Boston Law Review 72(3). 463.Search in Google Scholar
Stenlund, Mari & Pamela Slotte. 2018. Forum internum revisited: Considering the absolute core of freedom of belief and opinion in terms of negative liberty, authenticity, and capability. Human Rights Review 19. 424. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12142-018-0512-8.Search in Google Scholar
Stephen, James F. 2005. A general view of the criminal law of England (1863). Clark, New Jersey: The Lawbook Exchange.Search in Google Scholar
Stephen, James F. 2014. A history of the criminal law of England (1883). Cambridge: CUP.10.1017/CBO9781139794572Search in Google Scholar
Strathern, Marilyn. 1999. Property, substance and effect: Anthropological essays on persons and things. London - London; New Brunswick, NJ: Athlone.Search in Google Scholar
Strathern, Marilyn & Eric Hirsch. 2004. Transactions and creations: Property debates and the stimulus of Melanesia. New York, Oxford: Berghahn Books.10.2307/j.ctv287skdk.10Search in Google Scholar
Thrift, Nigel. 2007. Non-representational theory: Space, politics, affect. London – New York: Routledge.10.4324/9780203946565Search in Google Scholar
Van Broeck, Jeroen. 2001. Cultural defence and culturally motivated crimes (cultural offences). European Journal of Crime, Criminal Law and Criminal Justice 9(1). 1–32.10.1163/15718170120519282Search in Google Scholar
von Liszt, Franz. 2002. Der Zweckgedanke im Strafrecht (1882/83). Baden-Baden: Nomos.Search in Google Scholar
Wagner, Anne. 2016. A space in-between—legal translation as a ‘third space’. Journal of Civil Law Studies 9. 167. Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.lsu.edu/jcls/vol9/iss1/8.Search in Google Scholar
Weber, Max. 2014. The Vocation Lectures. “Science as Vocation” – “Politics as Vocation” (1919). Indianapolis: Hackett.Search in Google Scholar
© 2020 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
Articles in the same Issue
- Frontmatter
- Editorial
- Instrumentalization of law as a socially constituted sign-system
- Research Articles
- Theory of Law, Jurilinguistics and Legal Language: A common task
- Border troubles. Some uncertainties of legal transfer
- Otherness, elsewhere, and the 'Ecology' of law's implications: The semiotic oceans surrounding legal signification and its discriminatory exteriority/objectivity
- Law as a culturally constituted sign-system – A space for interpretation
- Linguistic norm in legal language and legislative language – The issue of codification
- Cultural, textual and linguistic aspects of legal translation: A model of text analysis for training legal translators
- The model of Mary between Islam and Catholicism: The figurativization of normative principles in the intercultural exchange
- The semiotic puzzle: Authentic languages & international law
- The translation of affirmative action into legal discourse in Brazil
- Exploring cyberbullying: a socio-semiotic perspective
Articles in the same Issue
- Frontmatter
- Editorial
- Instrumentalization of law as a socially constituted sign-system
- Research Articles
- Theory of Law, Jurilinguistics and Legal Language: A common task
- Border troubles. Some uncertainties of legal transfer
- Otherness, elsewhere, and the 'Ecology' of law's implications: The semiotic oceans surrounding legal signification and its discriminatory exteriority/objectivity
- Law as a culturally constituted sign-system – A space for interpretation
- Linguistic norm in legal language and legislative language – The issue of codification
- Cultural, textual and linguistic aspects of legal translation: A model of text analysis for training legal translators
- The model of Mary between Islam and Catholicism: The figurativization of normative principles in the intercultural exchange
- The semiotic puzzle: Authentic languages & international law
- The translation of affirmative action into legal discourse in Brazil
- Exploring cyberbullying: a socio-semiotic perspective
