Abstract
The present work analyses a legal judgment, with the aim of assessing if, in it, there are marks of its authors’ subjectivity (a collective of judges). We intend, therefore, to verify if the judges responsible for the judgment leave traces of their position, especially in the reasoning part, which is constituted by the arguments of the judges to justify their final decision - note that legal judgments are a part of the legal discourse (free of subjectivity). For that, the judgement will be analyzed according to five categories, which represent linguistic mechanisms to express subjective language: polyphony; polyphonic negation; intensifiers and minimizers; expressions with (positive or negative) semantic polarity and, finally, expressions with modal values. The results obtained al- low us to state that, even though they are not always completely explicit, these mechanisms are used to convey the opinions of the collective of judges, whose position goes in the direction of excusing the offender, while disbelieving the voice of the victim.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
