About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

11 ICJ 1 (2025)

handle is hein.journals/icjuris11 and id is 1 raw text is: 



                   International Comparative   Jurisprudence  2025  Volume   11 Issue  1
               ISSN   2351-6674   (online) DOI: h



   MykolisRoieris       International Comparative                urisprudence
   University



                        THE   SEMANTICS OF LEGAL INTERPRETATION

                                              Pooja  Tomar'
                                          SMVD   University, India
                                      E-mail: 2_dpcO0l    irsmvdwac.in

                                         Satish  Kumar   Tiwari2
                              A.P.B. Government  Post Graduate College, India
                                     E-mail: thesktiwari89&nail.com


                             Received: 25 October 2024; accepted: 5 June 2025
                               DOI: hus.   doi.orp  0.i3]65/tic,202511.00]

Abstract: The interpretation of legal texts is a complex and critical task, requiring an in-depth understanding of both language
and law. This paper delves into the application of key semantic theories-referential theory, descriptive theory, use theory,
speech act theory, verification theory, and truth-conditional theory-to enhance the precision and clarity of legal interpretation.
Each of these theories offers distinct insights into how meaning is constructed, communicated, and understood within legal
contexts. By examining the nuances of these approaches, the paper explores how they intersect with prominent legal
interpretative theories, such as textualism, originalism, purposivism, and pragmatism, to guide legal interpreters in making
more informed decisions. Textualismbenefits from the direct, meaning-focused referential theory, while originalism is enriched
by the historical depth of descriptive theory. Use theory and speech act theory shed light on the practical and performative
aspects of legal language, providing new tools for purposivism and pragmatism. Verification and truth-conditional theories
further contribute by ensuring logical coherence and truth alignment in legal interpretation. Ultimately, the paper demonstrates
how  semantic theories can deepen our understanding of legal texts and enhance the interpretive process, leading to fairer and
more consistent legal outcomes. This interdisciplinary approach opens new pathways for bridging the gap between law and
language, ensuring that legal interpretation remains rigorous, adaptable, and aligned with both the intent of the law and societal
needs.

Keywords:  Semantic Theories, Legal Interpretation, Referential Theory, Descriptive Theory, Use Theory, Speech Act Theory,
Verification Theory, Truth-Conditional Theory.

Introduction

The  process  of legal interpretation is one of the most intricate aspects of the legal system, requiring a
sophisticated understanding   of language,  meaning,  and  intent. Legal texts, such as statutes, contracts,
and  judicial opinions, are often complex,   containing  terms whose   meanings   may  vary depending   on
context,  historical usage, and  the intent of their drafters or  interpreters. Consequently,  theories  of
meaning from semantics play a critical role in guiding legal interpreters-judges, lawyers, and
scholars-in   deciphering  these texts and  applying  their principles to specific cases. In the context of
judicial opinions,  application refers to the  use of these  rulings as precedents  to resolve  disputes,
ensuring  consistency and  adherence  to established legal principles. Semantics, the branch of linguistics
concerned   with  meaning,  offers  a variety of theories  that can  aid in understanding   how  language
functions  within  legal texts. While   existing methods   of  legal interpretation-such as textualism,
purposivism,   and the  use of canons   of construction-have provided significant insights, challenges
persist in achieving consistent and universally accepted  interpretations. For example, ambiguity  in legal


1 Research scholar at the School of Philosophy & Culture at SMVD  University, Katra, Jammu, India. Orcid ID:
0009-0006-4291-9463.
2 Assistant professor at A.P.B. Government  Post Graduate College, Agastyamuni,  Rudraprayag, Uttarakhand,
India. ORCID  ID: 0009-0004-6073-6156.


1

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

profiles profiles most