On legal inferentialism: Towards a pragmatics of semantic content in legal interpretation

Abstract. In this paper we consider whether a pragmatics of semantic content can be a useful approach to legal interpretation. More broadly speaking, since a pragmatic conception of meaning is a component of inferential semantics, we consider whether an inferentialist approach to legal interpretation can be useful in dealing with some problems of this important aspect of law. In other words, we ask whether Legal Inferentialism is a suitable conception for legal interpretation. In Section 1 we briefly consider the semantics/pragmatics debate in contemporary philosophy of language and in relation to legal interpretation. In Section 2 we discuss the relations between a pragmatics of semantic content and an inferentialist conception of content. In Section 3 we consider how Inferentialism can be applied to legal interpretation. Finally, in Section 4 we consider some possible advantages and drawbacks of Inferentialism applied to legal interpretation and adjudication. 1. The Semantics/Pragmatics Debate and Legal Interpretation One of the most interesting topics in contemporary philosophy of language concerns the relation between semantics and pragmatics, and the attempt to redefine it (see, e.g., Bianchi 2004; Bach 1999; see also Récanati 1993, 260ff.). Based on the theoretical framework delineated by Charles Morris and Rudolf Carnap in the middle of the twentieth century, we usually divide the study of language into three main fields: syntax, semantics and pragmatics (see Morris 1938; Carnap 1939).1 Traditionally, syntax deals with the study of the relations between expressions; semantics with the study of meaning (the relations between expressions and what they stand for); and pragmatics with the study of the relations between expressions and those 1 Remember, however, that the distinction has distinguished ancestors. Consider the Medieval classification (Trivium) according to which Grammar teaches us how to speak correctly, Logic how to speak truly and Rhetoric how to speak elegantly (cf. Moody 1953)