Linguistic controversy in the sphere of law making and enforcement

We analyze the linguistics and legal nature of the legal discourse of various types of legal activity: law-making, law-realization, as a result of which we reveal new formal and linguistic features of legal texts. On the example of article 358 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation on ecocide we reveal a number of shortcomings: the choice of the wrong member of the synonymous series and the non-specific content of the sanction. Revealed certain linguistic shortcomings can become an obstacle to the successful use of this legal norm in the process of its implementation. The weak development of lawyers’ linguistic skills, which they need for the proper exercise of their authorities, the inability to adequately express the thought can lead to infringement of the rights, freedoms and legitimate interests of citizens. Textual shortcomings, as well as gross linguistic errors, reduce the effectiveness of Russian legislation, make it difficult to understand the essence of the legal norm. To solve these problems, it is necessary to conduct a competent linguistic examination, which will increase the text indicators of the regulatory act. The prospects of interaction of legal and linguistic sciences are reasonable due to the emergence of new directions of interaction of jurisprudence with various linguistic interdisciplinary directions (semiotics, socio- and psycholinguistics, cognitive linguistics, etc.).

legal linguistics, linguistic and legal analysis, law language, linguistic expertise, legal text, art. 358 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation