This collection of contributions from both linguists and lawyers brings a pragmatic perspective to the linguistic basis for legal meaning and for finding a norm by which to decide a case. That is, it turns from notions of linguistic meaning as residing in the text, as literal meaning waiting to be dug out, to focus instead on how readers infer pragmatic meaning, and on the kinds of inferencing that characterise legal discourse.

The paper takes as its point of departure a more modern, pragmatics-based concept of “genre” at the base of which is the a notion of a social activity in a specific configuration or actional purpose, with use of language embedded in and determined by these pragmatic, language-external vectors. Such a concept lends itself more easily to a conceptualization of a complex social action like mobbing as a unitary, coordinated activity, with all component actions steered by a joined overarching goal. Testing (...) the notion of “genre” on such a complex borderline case will at the same time bring out both defining structural properties of mobbing actions and the theoretical issues incumbent on the notion of “genre”, especially how far the concept can be stretched to cover complex, multimedial social actions. (shrink)