再论许霆案的定性——以语义特征分析为视角

A Reconsideration of the Court Decision on Xu Ting's Case——In the Perspective of Semantic Features

许霆案的合理定性是一个值得探究的问题。许霆案的合理定性取决于对许霆行为的合理定性。这需要深入词语内部进一步探察"盗窃"及其相关词语的确切所指,本文通过对"盗窃"及其相关词语的语义特征分析,发现"盗窃"的"秘密性"只与失者相关,"失者不知晓"即为"秘密","失者知晓"即为"公开"。通过比对相关词语,我们发现,"盗窃"还有一个重要的语义特征"[-给出]",即被转移的事物是"非给出"的,而许霆的行为则与该语义特征相冲突,许霆的行为不是"盗窃"。此时的许霆只是"接受者",许霆案被认定为盗窃罪是不合适的。

It is worthwhile to consider the reasonable qualitative of Xu Ting＇s case. As a justified decision should be based on the idiosyncrasies of the actus,a close examination of the term ＂larceny＂,and its semantic significance is needed to illustrate the nature of the case better. This paper analyzes the semantic features of the word ＂larceny＂and other related words,and thereby finds that the＂secrecy＂of＂larceny＂is relevant only to the owner of lost property. The word＂secrecy＂denotes the state of unknowing on the part of the owner,while ＂openness＂refers to the owner＇s state of knowing. Furthermore,the paper finds that one crucial semantic feature of＂Larceny＂is [-give],i. e. the lost item is not＂given＂. Obviously,the act of Xu Ting is in conflict with the above defined semantic feature,which shows that his act does not conform to that of＂larceny＂. In this case,Xu Ting merely performs the role of a＂recipient＂,and hence it is not proper to indict him with larceny charges.