明清传奇互文性创作研究——以传奇对《牡丹亭》的接受为中心

互文性是文学作品的天然属性,互文性理论的核心和出发点即在于对文本及其生成进行研究。由于传奇文体的独特性,其互文特质尤为明显。以明清传奇对《牡丹亭》的创作接受为例,可以考察明清传奇互文性创作的生成、表现、类型和心理。     

《论语》杂志的政治批评与公共领域之建构

《论语》杂志的思想资源有很大一部分来自平社和《语丝》,该刊承载了自由主义知识分子对政治现象的观察与思考,具有明显的政治维度。《论语》坚守知识分子的独立身份和政治上的中间立场,将政治批评和幽默话语结合起来,获得了较大的自由批评空间。同时,它充分发挥自身作为公共论坛在汇聚意见、形成舆论上的优势,鼓动公众对各种政治问题展开讨论。《论语》在政治批评上的诸种努力,促进了二十世纪三四十年代公共领域的建构。     

《民法典》动产留置规则的解释论——兼论《民法典》第448条与《劳动法》的衔接

理论上留置权具有留置和优先受偿两重效力,但在我国《民法典》体系下,留置权的功能应当是优先受偿,留置权的留置功能服务于优先受偿功能,不能成为一项独立的功能。《民法典》动产留置规则应当紧紧围绕留置权的优先受偿功能展开,留置权优先受偿的法理基础在于债权行为对留置动产的保值增值。留置权适用的债权类型应当是一个开放的体系,但留置权不能适用于侵权行为和侵害型不当得利产生的债权。同一法律关系应当理解为债权因被留置的动产而产生,并且在通常情况下,债权的产生能使被留置的动产保值增值。劳动关系所产生的债权并不必然排除留置权的适用。     

个人信息保护的私法维度——兼论《民法典》与《个人信息保护法》的关系

个人信息的私法保护路径对于有效保障民事主体的个人信息权益十分重要;《个人信息保护法》本身包含大量的私法规范、制度和原则,因此需要从体系化的角度与《民法典》作关联解读与适用.由此,需要充分认识到《民法典》与《个人信息保护法》之间的内在密切关联,正确看待二者的关系.《民法典》与《个人信息保护法》中的私法规范构成普通法与特别法的关系,在后者有明确规定的时候应优先适用,而在其没有规定的时候应适用《民法典》的规则.在个人信息保护的法律适用中将二者割裂甚至对立起来的观点或者对《民法典》采取排斥封闭的态度,都会破坏法律体系的和谐和法律适用的统一,对个人信息保护来说也是不利的.     

论可专利性的道德例外——以《欧洲专利公约》为例

本文以《欧洲专利公约》为视角,讨论了可专利性的道德例外的立法方式问题。认为,专利法规定可专利性的道德例外不可避免,但立法机构在就此做出规定时应当尽其所能设想并穷尽所有他们认为是不道德的因而是不能赋予专利权的发明创造;同时应当区分引起道德问题的原因,对于那些由于对专利技术的公开发表与开发而引起的道德问题,由于其不是因为授予专利权本身引起的,因而不应当由专利法来调整,也不应当由专利管理部门来讨论和决定。     

“小叙事”何以获取？——《送法下乡》与《论私力救济》个案研究之比较

苏力《送法下乡》与徐昕《论私力救济》对正处在研究方法转向中的中国法学而言意义重大。两书主题和内容各异，但表述方法却有一定程度的相似：都采取了以个案为切入的写作进路。然而在“小叙事”的获取方式上，两位作者却是迥异的。把两书中个案获取方式进行比较，可以发现《论私力救济》与《送法下乡》中的一致与转变。这种以个案切入为写作思路的转换是目前中国法学研究典范更迭的一个表征。     

《浊江》和《倾城之恋》中戏剧要素的对照分析——借用视点结构相关理论

《浊江》和《倾城之恋》对于戏剧要素的运用,使得其文本呈现出混合小说与戏剧两种不同文学形式的跨界性。在两部作品中,人物对话中出现的戏剧要素主要体现为视点结构的运用。小说通过弱化叙述者的声音,使文本意义的多重建构成为可能,打破了权威性和绝对性的价值判断。这既是基于作家个人对于戏剧的观察和体悟,又体现出非主体叙述这一女性写作的特征和动荡时期话语权分散的历史必然性。对作为明治的民间说书人的樋口一叶,与自称为自食其力的小市民的张爱玲之作品的对照分析,可以为不同国籍作者的作品中体现出相似的集体意识这一文学现象,提供具体而微的观察渠道,深化对小说之社会心理史意义的认知。     

“立宪”的隐微与显白——评张君劢的《穆勒约翰议院政治论》

张君劢精心选择了《代议制政府》而不是《政府论》进行译介。这暗示了张君劢的独特立场。借此,他运用别样的翻译技巧并借助特殊的作品形式,表达了其的立宪立场和宪政实现的策略。作品透露出来的方法和策略深远地影响着张君劢的宪政思想和实践。     

积极刑法观之面相、根据和实践限度的教义学分析——以《刑法修正案(十一)》为分析文本

当代刑法立法践行的积极刑法观,有社会根据、政策根据和民意认同。从技术层面看,积极刑法观是通过增设新罪或修改旧罪之构成要素实现的,且以无实害结果犯罪的面相呈现。《刑法修正案(十一)》是典型的践行积极刑法观的立法,且以行为犯、危险犯和情节犯等面相回应社会之需,并以保护公共安全、市场经济秩序、社会管理秩序和国家军事利益等集体法益为重。与消极刑法观相比,积极刑法观的实质是朝向未来的预防理念。积极刑法观引领的刑法突破了传统刑法的范式,但以传统刑法理论批评积极刑法观,并不必然意味着其一定违反了法治原则。相反,其映照出了传统刑法的内卷化迹象。应理性看待积极刑法观,其以预防正义为基础,并通过对刑法功能的转变、扩张集体法益和把新权益纳入管辖范畴等方式去内卷化。但基于刑法双面刃特征,积极刑法观应把限制入罪的行为范畴和高概率因果关系作为最低的实践限度。     

传统与西化的取舍:民国旧知识人的法律观——以《清史稿·刑法志》编纂为中心的考察

民国初年,当时政府特开设清史馆编纂清史。入馆之人大多为深谙传统文化的饱学之士,并非如后人所谓均为"遗老"。虽然相对"五四"新文化人来说,这批人可称为"旧知识人",但其政治态度、法律观念并非完全保守与落后。考察《清史稿.刑法志》的编纂过程及其所体现的在传统法律与西方法律之间的取舍态度即可见一斑。     

公众意见在裁判结构中的地位

从裁判依据的类型分析,公众意见只能作为一种事实依据,参与个案裁判。在常规案件中,公众意见作为一种准用的辅助性依据,可以通过弱的裁量成为合理化判决结论的说明性事实。在遇有法律漏洞的疑难案件中,与社会性主张相一致的公众意见,如果耦合法律体系中的法律原则或基本权利规范,可以籍由强的裁量充当个案推理的运作性依据,成为非常情形中正当化个案规则创制的立法性事实。在日趋多元化和复杂化的转型中国,法律系统必须在稳定性和灵活性、普遍正义和个案正义之间寻求一种平衡;判断公众意见的个案裁判地位,同样需在辅助性依据或运作性依据、说明性事实或立法性事实之间寻求一种平衡。     

The Death Penalty: A Multi-level Analysis of Public Opinion

Considerable research has examined public opinion of the death penalty using simplistic questions such as, “Do you favor or oppose the death penalty.” Simply categorizing people into favoring or opposing capital punishment does little to address the array of factors and circumstances that are part of every murder. We examine variables concerning the nature of homicides from a set of 40 murder vignettes used to gauge respondents’ level of support for capital punishment in murder cases. The data are structured such that vignette responses are nested within individuals, meaning a multi-level analysis is appropriate. We used HLM to explore how vignette-level or homicide related characteristics influence support for the death penalty, as well as how individual-level characteristics condition these factors. Analyses revealed that individual-level variables were non-significant when analyzed independently; however, cross-level interactions indicated significant individual-level influences on homicide-level characteristics as they relate to respondents’ support for the death penalty.     

The Court of Public Opinion: Lay Perceptions of Polygraph Testing

We sampled a total of 411 participants and randomly assigned them one of three brief trial vignettes that contained either no-polygraph evidence, evidence of a passed polygraph test, or evidence of a failed polygraph test. Participants rendered guilt judgments and answered a series of questions concerning the trial in particular, and polygraph tests in general. Similar to previous studies on the impact of polygraph evidence on jurors' guilt judgments, this sample of jury-eligible adults indicated that they did not find polygraph test evidence to be persuasive. Moreover, it mattered little to participants whether the results indicated the defendant passed a polygraph test, or that he failed a polygraph test. However, when our findings are compared to those of previous surveys involving experts in the field of psychophysiology, they differ in a number of important respects. The implications for decisions regarding admissibility (e.g., U.S. v. Alexander, 1975 and U.S. v. Scheffer, 1998) are discussed.     

论刑事司法实践中的民意影响

本文结合典型案例从刑事司法实践中的案件事实认定、法律适用以及裁判执行三个方面,详细探讨民意的影响,并剖析其中原因,认为民意的感性化和情绪化并不一定构成司法警惕民意的理由。但是为了维护法律的权威、促进司法的公平正义,司法绝不能仅仅为了获取社会公众的认同而盲目顺从民意,必须始终坚持法律至上原则,与民意保持适当距离,对民意的考量只能在法官的自由裁量权范围内进行。     

The Role Of Legal Consciousness and Public Opinion in Fixing Punishment

The Principles of Criminal Legislation of the USSR and the Union Republics provide that the court shall designate punishment for a guilty person within the limits provided in the article of the law stipulating responsibility for the crime committed, taking into account the nature and degree of social danger of the crime committed, the personality of the guilty individual and the circumstances of the case, ameliorating or exacerbating responsibility, being guided therein by a socialist legal consciousness (Art. 32).     

The Court of Public Opinion and the Practice of Restorative Ordeals in Pre-Modern India

According to their standardized treatment within the Indian legal tradition (Dharmaśāstra), ordeals (Sanskrit: divya) are supposed to occur, under certain circumstances, when one person formally accused another of some crime in a court of law. While not disputing the general accuracy of this standardized treatment of ordeals, this article argues for the widespread practice in pre-modern India of another—hitherto unrecognized—type of ordeal that fails to fit this basic scenario, for such ordeals would occur when someone was widely believed to have committed some wrongdoing, but was not forced to stand trial in a formal judicial court. In order to prove his innocence and, thereby, mitigate the damage caused by his suspected guilt, such an individual could—and sometimes did—arrange for himself to undergo an ordeal at his own expense and independently of any formal plaint. After establishing the practice of ordeals of this sort in pre-modern India, this article then examines some possible explanations for their development.     

网络时代的舆论与司法——以哈贝马斯的公共领域理论为视角

公共领域是一个公民自由讨论公共事务的空间.在网络信息时代,新媒体的出现使承载舆论的公共领域发生了结构性的变化,导致了"公共领域的第三次结构转型".2009年以来,多宗演变成影响性事件的司法案件表明,当下中国的司法恰逢公共领域转型和社会转型的双重变奏,其运作的过程和裁判的结果深受舆论的影响甚至左右.为了在舆论与司法之间培育起健康的关系,必须既保障开放的舆论空间,又保障依司法独立运行,并通过司法的透明化赢得社会公众对司法的信任.     

The Role of Public Opinion in Improving Legislation in the Fight Against Crime

In the decree of the CPSU Central Committee "On improving work in the maintenance of law and order and strengthening the fight against crime," the need for increasing public involvement in the fight against crime and other antisocial behavior is pointed out. (1) The role and functions of public involvement increase significantly under conditions of developed socialism. Its effect as a subjective factor is directly dependent on the qualitative condition, structure, and content of public consciousness and its component parts. Therefore, not only does multi-faceted study of public consciousness as an integrative factor of the social organism as a whole have important theoretical and practical import but so also does clarification of the inner content of public consciousness and of the characteristics of the mechanism of the formation of its separate components, for example, of public opinion, which plays a significant role in the policy of the Soviet state with regard to the eradication of crime. (2)