Startseite Towards autonomy of China’s legal terminology system: a corpus-based analysis of terminological variation in criminal procedure legislation
Artikel
Lizenziert
Nicht lizenziert Erfordert eine Authentifizierung

Towards autonomy of China’s legal terminology system: a corpus-based analysis of terminological variation in criminal procedure legislation

  • Weilan Luo und Suqing Yu EMAIL logo
Veröffentlicht/Copyright: 26. Mai 2025
Veröffentlichen auch Sie bei De Gruyter Brill

Abstract

The autonomy of the legal terminology system is a key aspect of China’s legal modernization. The evolution of legal terminology not only reflects linguistic adjustments but also embodies the dynamic interaction between the legal system and societal development. This study adopts a corpus-based approach to explore the construction of an autonomous legal terminology system using texts from China’s criminal procedure legislation. Through both quantitative and qualitative analyses of legislative texts from different historical periods, the study identifies patterns of terminological variation and the underlying influencing factors. The findings suggest that changes in legal terminology are closely tied to developments within the legal system and are significantly shaped by external factors such as political, cultural, economic, social, and technological changes. This study argues that achieving autonomy in China’s legal terminology system requires balancing the preservation of traditional legal culture with the need for terminological innovation to support the rule of law. Strengthening the autonomy of China’s legal terminology system will contribute to domestic legal reforms and enhance China’s presence in global legal discourse.


Corresponding author: Suqing Yu, East China University of Political Science and Law, Shanghai, China, E-mail:

  1. Research funding: This work was supported by the National Social Science Fund of China 2020 Project entitled The Legal Language Changes and Contextualization in the Modernizing Process of Criminal Procedure System in China (Grant No. 20BYY075).

References

Cao, Deborah. 2007. Translating law. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.10.21832/9781853599552Suche in Google Scholar

Chen, Xingliang. 2006. A study of the criminal policy of balancing severity and leniency. Law Science Magazine(1). 17–25.Suche in Google Scholar

Cheng, Le & Xiuli Liu. 2022. Politics behind the law: Unveiling the discursive strategies in extradition hearings on Meng Wanzhou. International Journal of Legal Discourse 7(2). 235–255. https://doi.org/10.1515/ijld-2022-2072.Suche in Google Scholar

Cheng, Le, Jiamin Pei & Marcel Danesi. 2019. A sociosemiotic interpretation of cybersecurity in U.S. legislative discourse. Social Semiotics 29(3). 286–302. https://doi.org/10.1080/10350330.2019.1587843.Suche in Google Scholar

Engberg, Jan. 2023. Frame approach to legal terminology: What may be gained from seeing terminology as manifestation of legal knowledge? In Łucja Biel & Hendrik J. Kockaert (eds.), Handbook of terminology (Volume 3 Legal Terminology), 16–36. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.10.1075/hot.3.fra2Suche in Google Scholar

Faber, Pamela & Arianne Reimerink. 2019. Framing terminology in legal translation. International Journal of Legal Discourse 4(1). 15–46. https://doi.org/10.1515/ijld-2019-2015.Suche in Google Scholar

Fairclough, Norman & Ruth Wodak. 1997. Critical discourse analysis. In Teun A. van Dijk (ed.), Discourse as social interaction, vol. 2, 258–284. London: Sage.Suche in Google Scholar

Feng, Zhiwei. 2006. Conception system and ontology in terminology. Terminology Standardization and Information Technology(1). 9–15.Suche in Google Scholar

Feng, Guo. 2023. On the construction of concept system of China’s independent knowledge system of legal science. Wuhan University Journal (Philosophy & Social Sciences) 76(6). 101–111.Suche in Google Scholar

He, Qinhua. 2002. Reflections on transplanting western judicial systems in new-era China. Law Science(9). 3–12.Suche in Google Scholar

He, Qinhua & Yiyuan Liu. 2024. On the inheritance of the Chinese legal system and the construction of China’s independent knowledge system of legal science. China Legal Review 1. 1–21.Suche in Google Scholar

He, Qinhua & Peixin Lu. 2024. On constructing indigenous resources for building an autonomous Chinese knowledge system of legal science: A perspective from the inheritance and innovation of ancient Chinese legal studies. Journal of East China University of Political Science and Law 2. 107–120.Suche in Google Scholar

Hou, Xuebin. 2024. On the concept of the rule of law system. Social Sciences in China(9). 29–30.Suche in Google Scholar

Jiao, Hongchang. 2004. A constitutional analysis of “the state respects and protects human rights”. China Legal Science 3. 42–49.Suche in Google Scholar

L’Homme, Marie-Claude (ed.). 2020. Lexical semantics for terminology: An introduction. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.Suche in Google Scholar

Lin, Hua & Jianghao Xia. 2023. Principles and methods for constructing an autonomous knowledge system of Chinese law. Journal of Social Sciences(4). 13–22.Suche in Google Scholar

Mollnau, Karl A. 1989. The contributions of Savigny to the theory of legislation. American Journal of Comparative Law 37(1). 81–93. https://doi.org/10.2307/840442.Suche in Google Scholar

Pei, Jiamin & Le Cheng. 2020. Mapping terminological variation and ideology in data protection laws. Terminology 26(2). 159–183. https://doi.org/10.1075/term.00049.pei.Suche in Google Scholar

Qu, Wensheng. 2012. Reflections on the problems and causes in translating Chinese legal terminology for foreign audiences—with discussion on the normatization of Chinese legal term translations in recent years. Chinese Translators Journal(6). 68–75.Suche in Google Scholar

Sabela, Fernández-Silva, Judit Freixa & Maria Teresa Cabré. 2011. A proposed method for analysing the dynamics of cognition through term variation. Terminology 17(1). 49–73.10.1075/term.17.1.04ferSuche in Google Scholar

Song, Lijue & Changshan Ma. 2022. Identifying the fourth generation of human rights in digital era. International Journal of Legal Discourse 7(1). 83–111. https://doi.org/10.1515/ijld-2022-2065.Suche in Google Scholar

Trklja, Aleksandar. 2024. Discourse patterning and recursion in the EU case law. International Journal of Legal Discourse 9(1). 93–119. https://doi.org/10.1515/ijld-2024-2004.Suche in Google Scholar

Wang, Jianhua. 2002. The constitution and classification of context. Applied Linguistics(3). 2–9.Suche in Google Scholar

Wang, Limin. 2025. Revitalizing the Chinese legal system and developing China’s independent legal knowledge system. Political Science and Law(1). 80–96.Suche in Google Scholar

Yin, Bo & Peter Duff. 2010. Criminal procedure in contemporary China: Socialist, civilian or traditional. International and Comparative Law Quarterly 59(4). 1099–1128. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0020589310000618.Suche in Google Scholar

Zhang, Xiaohu. 2019. The essence of the criminal policy of tempering justice with mercy and the supplementation of China’s penal system. Jiangsu Social Sciences(5). 131–140.Suche in Google Scholar

Zhang, Wenxian. 2023. On the construction of China’s autonomous knowledge system of legal science. The Jurist(2). 1–15.Suche in Google Scholar

Zhao, Wanyi. 2024. Constructing an autonomous Chinese knowledge system of legal science. New Liberal Arts Education Research(1). 122–128.Suche in Google Scholar

Zhu, Zhen. 2024. An outline of the conceptual framework for constructing an autonomous Chinese knowledge system of legal science. Law and Modernization 1. 59–67.Suche in Google Scholar

Received: 2024-08-06
Accepted: 2025-02-20
Published Online: 2025-05-26
Published in Print: 2025-06-26

© 2025 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Heruntergeladen am 22.9.2025 von https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/ijld-2025-2008/html
Button zum nach oben scrollen