negotiating role of institution: institutions mediating legal knowledge to citizens

AARHUSUNIVERSITETAU

NEGOTIATING ROLE OFINSTITUTION

Institutions mediating legal knowledge to citizens

Jan Engberg

Caserta, May 27 2016

AARHUSUNIVERSITETAU Jan Engberg


INTERESTS BEHIND STUDY

§ Basic questions: How do EU legal institutions (European Parliament, European Court of Justice) implement popularization – and for what purposes?

§ Establish first hypotheses for more comprehensive analysis of web presentation

§ Focus: Multimodal elements available at websites + characteristics of input to knowledgeconstrucion process



RESEARCH QUESTIONS

o How do the institutions create input to the knowledge construction of the citizen side of the social negotiation process about the identity of the institution by way of multimodal communicative means?

o What popularization functions do the institutions perform with the investigated multimodal texts?

o What parts of the specialized knowledge about the institutions are mediated in the texts?

o To what extent are the affordances of page- and image-flow (= position and sequential ordering on page; Bateman 2008, 2009, Maier/Engberg 2014) exploited in order to popularize the content?



For at få punktopstilling på teksten

(flere niveauer findes),

For at få venstrestillet tekst uden punktopstilling, brug

Knowledge asymmetry is a relation which is produced in communication. The discursiveconstruction of knowledge asymmetry is observable via perturbations. Knowledge asymmetry becomes communicativelly salient where a single-plane distinction is observedbetween the knowledges of ‚alter‘ and ‚ego‘. The distinction is one which allows one ormore position to appreciate the knowledge of ‚alter‘ and ‚ego‘ as being non-identicalunder the same sortal.

Kastberg 2011, 145

KNOWLEDGE ASYMMETRIES I






§ Popularization (= Recontextualizing specialized knowledge, Calsamiglia / van Dijk 2004)

§ demonstrates (creates, emphasises) a knowledge asymmetry in a specific dimension (under the same sortal)

§ which the author simultaneously intends to coordinate

CONSEQUENCE POPULARIZATION






1. Rendering information, in order to§ be useful, widen the horizon of receiver, satisfy curiosity …

2. Influencing behaviour, in order to§ have control over own rights, take political decisions, …

3. Reducing alienation of citizens from legal institutions, in order to§ enhance democratic legitimacy of sender, …

(Engberg 2016; Liebert 2002; Preite 2013)

FUNCTIONS OF POPULARIZATION IN LEGALSETTINGS



INVESTIGATED COMMUNICATIVE EFFORTS

Court of Justice of the EU§ Brochure ” The Court of Justice, Composition, jurisdiction, and procedures”

http://curia.europa.eu/jcms/jcms/Jo2_7004/en/§ Focus: ”Diagram of the procedure before the court”

European Parliament§ Website ”Legislative Powers”

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/aboutparliament/en/20150201PVL00004/Powers-and-procedures§ Focus: Multimodal presentation ”Ordinary Legislative Procedure”



),

Input to knowledge construction - CJEU

§ The Composition of the Court of Justice§ Jurisdiction

§ The various types of proceedings§ Procedure

§ Commencement of proceedings before the court and the written procedure

§ Preparatory inquiries and the report for the hearing

§ The hearing and the Advocate General’s opinion

§ Judgements§ Special forms of procedure§ The costs of proceedings§ Language arrangements

Headings of the brochure

§ Diagram of the procedure



CHARACTERISTICS OF INPUT - CJEU

Brochure in general§ Factual, encyclopedic information (number of people, course of procedure, sub-types of procedure)§ General scarcity of causal or functional information



QUALITATIVE KNOWLEDGE RELATIONS

o Basis: Human cognition works with less than full complexity in knowledge structures, which we are content with as explanations (Illusion of Explanatory Depth, Rosenblitz / Keil 2002)

o Level of complexity of sceletal causal knowledge structuresØ Causal relevance: Properties matter causally, but no details givenØ Causal powers: Notions of the particular causal role of property, but no details on

underlying mechanismsØ Causal relations: Presentation of deeper functional relations / mechanisms between

components, but no details on internal functional relations inside the componentsKeil 2003, 675-680



CHARACTERISTICS OF INPUT - CJEU

Diagram – focus points from affordances of multimodality§ Dominated by page-flow (positioning rather than sequencing); not independently readable§ Different, but parallel ways to start the procedure§ Overlaps between the two ways (same basic reaction of court)§ Written procedure before oral procedure, optionality of some steps§ Most central persons involved (Judge Rapporteur, Advocat General)§ Sceletal causal relations à causal relevance (participants in proces, few causal properties of

participants)

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/aboutparliament/en/20150201PVL00004/Powers-and-procedures



STATUS OF MULTIMODAL ELEMENT

§ Overview text in right-hand pane

§ Multimodal element most detailed presentation of regular legislative procedure

§ More specialised procedures described in writing



TYPES OF INPUT – EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT

Website

§ Encyclopedic information (history, participants, …)§ Functional information about function with focus upon power of European Parliament



TYPES OF INPUT – EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT

Diagram – focus points from affordances of multimodal element

§ Dominated by image-flow§ Influences indicated in visual mode (if-then structures)§ Process as path indicated in visual mode§ Powers of institutions at different steps indicated in visual mode§ Sceletal causal structure à causal powers (influence and causal role of players indicated, but no

detail on specific procedures)

à Higher level of complexity, emphasising role as popular control of legislative procedure – reducing alienation?



CONCLUSION: ROLE OF MULTIMODAL ELEMENTS

§ Independent and central (EP) vs. dependent and supplementary (CJEU) element§ Exploitation of affordances of image-flow (EP) vs. page-flow (CJEU) § Level of conceptual complexity

§ EP: Presentation of causal roles (Causal powers)§ CJEU: Presentation of properties (Causal relevance)

§ Serving of different basic functions of popularisation§ EP: Reducing alienation?§ CJEU: Information about legal procedure



REFERENCES IBateman, John (2008), Multimodality and Genre. A Foundation for the Systematic Analysis of Multimodal Documents (New York: Palgrave Macmillan).Bateman, John (2009), 'Discourse across Semiotic Modes', in Jan Renkema (ed.), Discourse, of course . An Overview of Research in Discourse Studies (Amsterdam: John Benjamins), 55-67.Calsamiglia, Helena and Van Dijk, Teun A. (2004), 'Popularization Discourse and Knowledge about the Genome', Discourse & Society, 15 (4), 369-89.Engberg, Jan (2016), 'Fachkommunikation und fachexterne Kommunikation.', in Ekkehard Felder and FriedemannVogel (eds.), Handbuch Sprache im Recht (Berlin: de Gruyter).Jacobsen, Ushma Chauhan (2012), 'Knowledge Asymmetries. A situated inquiry in three sites of professional communication', (Aarhus University).Kastberg, Peter (2011), 'Knowledge Asymmetries : Beyond to Have and Have Not', Fachsprache - International Journal of Specialized Communication, 34 (3-4), 137-51.



REFERENCES IIKeil, Frank (2003), 'Categorisation, causation, and the limits of understanding', Language and Cognitive Processes,18 (5-6), 663-92.Liebert, Wolf-Andreas (2002), Wissenstransformationen: Handlungssemantische Analysen von Wissenschafts- und Vermittlungstexten (Studia linguistica Germanica; 63; Berlin: de Gruyter).Maier, Carmen Daniela and Engberg, Jan (2014), 'Tendencies of Multimodal Gradations in Academic Genres Network', in Jan Engberg, Carmen Daniela Maier, and Ole Togeby (eds.), Reflections upon genre. Encounters between literature, Knowledge and emerging communicative conventions (Tübingen: Narr), 113-45.Preite, Chiara (2013), 'Comunicare il diritto: strategie di divulgazione del discorso giuridico', in Cristina Bosisio and Stefania Cavagnoli (eds.), Comunicare le discipline attraverso le lingue: prospettive traduttiva, didattica, socioculturale (Perugia: Guerra Edizioni), 245-62.Rozenblit, Leonid and Keil, Frank C. (2002), 'The misunderstood limits of folk science: an illusion of explanatory depth', Cognitive Science, 26, 521-62.

negotiating role of institution: institutions mediating legal knowledge to citizens

Social Media