The Context Theory In Clarifying Vagueness In Legal Language

In legal texts and the process of adjudication, vagueness is a very common phenomenon in legal language. More and more linguists and lawyers have studied legal language from different perspective. After Hart's open texture, Hans Kelsen's principle of completeness and Donald Dworkin's right answer thesis are additional two ways to resolve the vagueness in legal language. But the problem with these theories is that two theories could not be studied without the context. However, these two schools of thought do not point out directly that the context theory could clarify the vagueness of legal language. Thus, the author of this thesis tries to offer another perspective by a detailed analysis of the American Supreme Court cases to ascertain the way of classifying vagueness in the law.This thesis has provided two important orientations to study the vagueness by using the theory of context. Firstly, it is to explain and understand the legislative text and the opinions of the courts. Secondly, by way of verifying the functions of context, the vagueness in legal language can be classified.The author also believes that vague language in the legal text is inevitable. On the basis of detailed analysis of a Supreme Court case, the present study aims at finding out the omnipotence of the vagueness in the legislative texts and the court's opinions. By illustrating the combination of context theory and vagueness, the author wishes to provide a prototype for clarifying the vagueness in legal language.