Strategie di accessibilità e negoziazione in testi legali della UE in ELF: un approccio cognitivo-funzionale all’analisi critica del discorso in contesti migratori


Abstract – The present chapter focuses on a corpus of legal texts from the EU regarding immigration and political asylum, and concerns in particular the administrative practices involving immigrants in member states. At the basis of the study, there is the awareness that these specialized text-types are mainly built on pragmatic strategies which are principally and practically a reflection of Western routines. Such a biased representation of legal meanings and relationships is thus thought to be the main cause of misunderstandings between the parties involved, and damaging to the relationship between the authorities, on the one hand, and, on the other, the subjects of the procedures, both migrants and asylum seekers. It follows that a thorough procedure of analysis, and an intra-lingual translation (Gotti 2005) are needed. The corpus selected is analysed on the basis of a Critical Discourse Analysis (Fairclough 1995), and then reformulated through van Dijk’s macrorules (1980). The fieldwork concludes the practical part of the work, and serves to: (a) highlight the relevant incongruities between the illocutionary meanings of the original statements, and the perlocutionary effect produced on receivers; and (b) propose new formulae/new patterns of action, in order to make rules accessible (Widdowson 1979) to the real receivers of the texts.

DOI Code: 10.1285/i22390359v16p445

Keywords: power asymmetry; pragmatic markers; accessibility strategies; interaction moves


Austin J.L. 1962, How to Do Things with Words, Clarendon Press, Oxford.

Brown G. e Yule G. 1983, Discourse Analysis, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. De Beaugrande R. e Dressler W. 1981, Introduction to Text Linguistics, Longman, Londra.

Carrell P.L. e Eisterhold J.C. 1988, Schema Theory and ESL Reading Pedagogy, in Carrell P.L., Devine J. e Eskey D.E. (a cura di), Interactive Approaches to Second Language Reading, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 73-92.

Fairclough N. 1995, Critical Discourse Analysis, Longman, Londra.

Goffman E. 1981, Forms of Talk, University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia.

Gotti M. 2005, Investigating Specialized Discourse, Peter Lang, Berna.

Grice H.P. 1975, Logic and Conversation, in Cole P. e Morgan J.L. (a cura di), Syntax and Semantics 3: Speech Acts, Academic Press, New York, pp. 22-40.

Guido M.G. 1999, Processi di analisi e traduzione del discorso scientifico-settoriale inglese. Un modello psicopedagogico, Armando Editore, Roma.

Guido M.G. 2004, Mediating Cultures. A Cognitive Approach to English Discourse for the Social Sciences, LED, Milano.

Guido M.G. 2008, English as a lingua franca in cross-cultural immigration domains, Peter Lang, Berna.

Halliday M.A.K. 1994, An Introduction to Functional Grammar, Edward Arnold, Londra. Martin J. e White R. 2005, The Language of Evaluation: Appraisal in English, Palgrave

Macmillan, Londra/New York.

Provenzano M. 2003, Problemi Traduttivi nella Documentazione ufficiale della Commissione Europea, in Gallo G. (a cura di), La Traduzione: un Panorama Interdisciplinare, Besa Editrice, Nardò, pp. 291-300.

Provenzano M. 2008, The EU Legal Discourse of Immigration. A cross-cultural approach to accessibility and reformulation, Franco Angeli, Milano.

Searle J.R. 1969, Speech Acts, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Sperti S. 2014, Phonopragmatic Dimensions of ELF in Specialized Immigration Contexts, Tesi di Dottorato, Università del Salento.

Van Dijk T.A. 1980, Macrostructures: An Interdisciplinary Study of Global Structures in Discourse, Interaction, and Cognition, Erlbaum, Hillsdale.

Full Text: pdf


  • There are currently no refbacks.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribuzione - Non commerciale - Non opere derivate 3.0 Italia License.