THE CONCEPT OF JUSTICE IN THE ENGLISH-SPEAKING LEGAL WORLD PICTURE: COGNITIVE-DISCURSIVE ANALYSIS

Volodymyr O. Pavlov,

Email: pavlovvova333@gmail.com 

ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3319-9015 

Senior Lecturer

Kyiv University of Law of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine

DOI: https://doi.org/10.17721/StudLing2026.28.83-99

PDF  (UKRAINIAN)

ABSTRACT

The study is devoted to the cognitive-discursive analysis of the concept of JUSTICE in the English-speaking legal world picture. The object of study is the lexeme justice and its conceptual environment within legal discourse, and the subject is the frame structures, metaphorical projections and axiological coordinates that determine the cognitive architecture of the studied concept. The methodological basis of the work is an integrative approach that combines lexicographic-semantic analysis, frame modeling according to C. Fillmore and M. Minsky, the theory of conceptual metaphor by J. Lakoff and M. Johnson, as well as corpus analysis of collocations and the MIP metaphor identification procedure. As a result of the study, the core semantic components of the concept were established, namely BALANCE and IMPARTIALITY, four basic frames were identified (JUSTICE AS BALANCE, JUSTICE AS PROCEDURE, JUSTICE AS MORAL VALUE, JUSTICE AS AUTHORITY), and four metaphorical models were reconstructed, including JUSTICE IS SCALES, JUSTICE IS A PERSON, JUSTICE IS A BUILDING. A three-dimensional integrative model was proposed that combines the propositional, figurative-associative, and value-evaluative levels of the concept. It was established that JUSTICE functions as a super-concept of Anglo-American legal consciousness, integrating the legal and ethical dimensions. Prospects for further exploration are associated with the verification of the constructed model on the basis of judicial decisions of the US Supreme Court and the European Court of Human Rights.

Keywords: concept of JUSTICE, legal picture of the world, frame structure, conceptual metaphor, cognitive-discursive analysis, axiological component, English-language legal discourse.

  1. References:

    1. Блідченко-Найко, В. (2022). Особливості перекладацького відтворення концепту JUSTICE. Справедливість. Міжнародний філологічний часопис, 33–41. https://doi.org/10.31548/philolog2022.02.004
    2. Приходько, А. М. (2013). Концепти і концептосистеми. Дніпро: Видавництво Дніпропетровського національного університету.
    3. Тихоніна, С. І. (2025). Концепт у лінгвістичному просторі: від одиниці мислення до концептосфери. Актуальні питання гуманітарних наук, 86 (3), 229–234. https://doi.org/10.24919/2308-4863/86-3-34
    4. Azizov, S. (2025). Literary Discourse As Moral Laboratory: Reimagining “Crime” And “Justice” Through Cognitive-Linguistic Frameworks. Current Research Journal of Philological Sciences, 6 (12), 7–16. https://doi.org/10.37547/philological-crjps-06-12-03
    5. Cunningham, C. D. (1992). The Lawyer As Translator, Representation As Text: Towards An Ethnography Of Legal Discourse. Cornell Law Review, 77 (6), 1298–1379.
    6. Das, R. (2025). Noam Chomsky’s Concept Of Justice: A Philosophical Critique Of Power, Language, And Moral Responsibility. International Journal of Creative Research Thoughts, 13 (3), b206–b215.
    7. Douglas-Scott, S. (2015). Law, Justice and the Pervasive Power of the Image. Naveiñ Reet: Nordic Journal of Law and Social Research, 6, 17–34.
    8. Gedminaitė, A. (2023). Multimodal Metaphor in Public Discourse on Legal Issues: the Case of TED Talks. Vilnius: Vilnius University Press.
    9. Ilina, Halyna. (2021). Philosophical Discussion on Metaphor in the Paradigms of Cognitive Linguistics and Analytical Philosophy. Pedagogical Innovation: Ideas, Realities, Perspectives, 2 (27), 131–138. https://doi.org/10.32405/2413-4139-2021-2(27)-131-138
    10. Kaczmarek, P. (2011). Era prawodawców czy era tłumaczy? O dylemacie wyboru roli interpretatora. In Czy koniec teorii prawa? Z zagadnień teorii i filozofii prawa, by ed.Jabłoński. Wrocław: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Wrocławskiego.
    11. Lakoff, George, та Johnson, Mark. (1980). Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    12. Mannoni, M. (2021). Rights Metaphors Across Hybrid Legal Languages, Such as Euro English and Legal Chinese. International Journal for the Semiotics of Law – Revue internationale de Sémiotique juridique. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11196-020-09814-6
    13. Nazarov, (2024). Toward a dynamic frame-based ontology of legal terminology. Applied Ontology, 1–26. https://doi.org/10.3233/ao-230045
    14. Skuczyński, Paweł. (2022). Lawyer as a Translator. On the Metaphorical Understanding of the Expert Nature of Legal Professions. Radca Prawny, 2 (31), 227–238. https://doi.org/10.4467/23921943rp.22.030.16893
    15. Tryuk, M. (2012). Ty nic nie mów, ja będę tłumaczył. O etyce w tłumaczeniu ustnym. Warsaw: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.
    16. White, James Boyd. (1990). Justice as translation: An essay in cultural and legal criticism. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    17. Xu, Shuhui, Sun, Weiwei, та Zhang, Kaihang. (2026). Black–White Color Metaphors of Justice: Two Experiments on Justice as a Legal Value. Behavioral Sciences, 16 (3), 367. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs16030367