法律条文中的情态动词研究——以《民法典侵权责任编(草案)》为例

A Study of Modal Verbs in Legal Provisions——Take as an Example Civil Code Tort Liability Code (Draft)

立法语言的精确使用与否直接体现了我国民法典的立法水平。情态动词“应当”在立法语言中涵义丰富,使用频繁,是每一部法律文本中不可或缺的语言构成,其在法律中或用来设定责任、义务,或表示法律推定。在设定义务时,“应当”与“可以”功能划分不明确,使用混乱、不规范,对于强制性规范,宜统一使用“应当”表述;在表示责任承担时,应从民事立法意思自治角度出发,更多以“可以”“有权”来表达权利,减少“应当”的使用频率;在表示法律推定时,“知道或应当知道”与“明知”两种表述同时存在,涵义区分不明确;此外,条文中还存在缺少情态动词“应当”的情形,导致表述前后不一致,容易引起误读。立法语言作为传递立法意图和目的的媒介,须规范严谨。通过对情态动词的研究,以期促进立法语言的规范化。

The precise use of the legislative language directly reflects the legislative level of the Civil Code of China. The modal verb "should" is rich in meaning and frequently used in the legislative language and it is an indispensable language component in every legal text. It is used in law to set liabilities, obligations, or to presume legal presumptions. When setting obligations, the functions of "should" and "may" are not definitely defined, and the use is confusing and non-standard. For mandatory norms, the modal verb "should" needs to be used uniformly. When expressing liabilities, the modal verbs "may" and "be entitled to" to express the rights, thereby to reduce the frequency of use of "should" based on the autonomy of civil legislation. In the expression of legal deduction, the phrases of "know or should know" and "be fully aware of "coexist at the same time, though the distinction of their meaning is not clear. Moreover, the lack of the modal verb "should" in many provisions results in the inconformity in expression, and is likely to cause misunderstanding. As a medium for conveying legislative intentions and purposes, the legislative language must be standardized and rigorous, and through the study of modal verbs to promote the standardization of legislative language.