Developing the Language of the General Theory of Forensic Science
https://doi.org/10.30764/1819-2785-2018-13-4-24-27
Abstract
We know from experience that the language of the general theory of forensic science, like any science, is an extremely complex and diverse phenomenon. This language is characterized by specific “constructs” that arise as a result of specialized activity and can be effectively applied not only in the context of the conceptual theoretical framework of forensic science, but also by enforcement professionals in their daily practice. In order to ensure clarity, accuracy and accessibility of expressions in the language of the general theory of forensic science, to avoid polysemy of terms, vagueness and ambiguity of their content, and equivocality of expressions, special attention should be paid to the logical semantic processes in terminology inherent in this language. At the same time, questions need to be raised and addressed about the development of a general concept of terminological activity and the need to regulate and standardize both domestic and international terminology used in forensic expert practice.
About the Author
O. A. Krestovnikov
The Russian Federal Centre of Forensic Science of the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Candidate of Law, Head of the Information and Publishing Department
References
1. Einshtein A. Collected works in four volumes. Vol. 4: Articles. Reviews. Letters. The evolution of physics. Moscow: Nauka, 1967. 598 [1] p. (In Russ.)
2. Bogolyubov S.A., Kaz’min I.F., Lokshina M.D., Moskvin S.S., et al. The language of law / A.S. Pigolkin (ed.). Moscow: Yurid. lit., 1990. 192 p. (In Russ.)
3. Kerimov D.A. The culture and technology of lawmaking. Moscow: Yurid. lit., 1991. 160 p. (In Russ.) 4. Kim V.V., Blazhevich N.V. The language of science: Philosophical and methodological aspects. Ekaterinburg: Bank kul’turnoi informatsii, 1998. 214 p. (In Russ.)
4. Bartnik M., Lis W. Leksykon kryminalistyki: 100 podstawowych pojęć. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo C.H. Beck, 2016. XIX [1], 330 s.
5. Bugaev K.V. Legal language problems (on an example of criminalities and judicial examination). Modern Law. 2011. No. 10. P. 23–27. (In Russ.)
6. Burton W.C. Burton’s legal thesaurus. 3rd. ed. New York: Macmillan libr. ref. USA, 1998. XIX [1], 1012 p.
7. Brecht B. Theater: Plays. Articles. Statements: In five volumes. Vol. 4: Plays. Moscow: Iskusstvo, 1964. 441 p. (In Russ.)
8. Vakhshtain V. Everyday sociology and frame theory. St. Petersburg.: European University Press, 2011. 233 p. (In Russ.)
9. Sokolova E.E. One cannot be a psychologist without being a philosopher or Why disputes on notions make sense. Moscow University Psychology Bulletin. 2016. No. 1. P. 25–41. (In Russ.)
10. Kondakov N.I. A reference dictionary of logic. 2nd ed. Moscow: Nauka, 1976. 717 [3] p. (In Russ.)
Review
For citations:
Krestovnikov O.A. Developing the Language of the General Theory of Forensic Science. Theory and Practice of Forensic Science. 2018;13(4):24-27. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.30764/1819-2785-2018-13-4-24-27
Views:
1503
Email this article 