从词义到语境：“治外法权”误读、误用及误会

From Semantic to Context:the Misunderstanding,Misapplication and Mistaking about Exterritoriality

欲辨明治外法权与领事裁判权词义与意蕴乃中国近代史学者长期以来未竟之追求。弱化词语简单意义上的界分,发现英美学者对两词虽在词义上偶有混淆,但早就申明两词意蕴之区别。词语由英语到日语的转化中,日本学者保有此种区分,但并未如学界所认为的将此明晰确定;由日语到中文的转借中,相伴而生的是国人基于"和文汉读法"望文生义将治外法权误读为"治理外国人的法权",并基于误读造成"收回治外法权"的误用。在收回主权非常时期又基于民族情节导致以领事裁判权替代治外法权的误会。前述各端的明晰当有助于更好认识与理解近代语境下的外国在华司法管辖特权的真切状态。

It is an always pursuit for China＇s modern history scholars to distinguish the meaning and implication between exterritoriality and extraterritoriality. If weakening the demarcation about the terms, we will find that although the British and American scholars have aliasing about the meaning about two words, they also figure out the distinction implication, and the Japanese scholar proceed the distinction. But follows the transformation from Japanese to Chinese, the scholars misunderstand the meaning of the exterritoriality to ＂legal right to govern aliens＂, and deep to misapplication it as regain exterritoriality. Moreover, in the regain sovereignty circumstance, scholars mistaken consular jurisdiction to replace the exterritoriality. So it is beneficial for us to understand the foreign jurisdiction privileges in China, if we clarify the above questions.