До питання про визнання юридичного тлумачення мистецтвом
| dc.contributor.author | Звєрєв, Євген | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2018-01-17T12:51:57Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2018-01-17T12:51:57Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2017 | |
| dc.description.abstract | У статті проаналізовано питання визнання юридичного тлумачення мистецтвом, встановлено обов’язкові елементи для визнання належності певного витвору до творів мистецтва та перевірено на відповідність їм елементи юридичного тлумачення. | uk_UA |
| dc.description.abstract | The article analyzes the issue of recognition of legal interpretation as an art. Dealing primarily with historic and philosophic aspects, the author is trying to establish the connection between the features of the art and the features of legal interpretation. Starting with the definition of interpretation in the philosophical sense, the author attempts to establish the connection of this definition with the definition of art and tries to find out how the issue of interpretation corresponds with the issue of art. Claiming that the interpretation is a process of artistic nature, the author tries to stipulate that the major outcome of the artistic process is the pleasure state. This pleasure state, being initiated by the artistic process, may well be a part of the nature of interpretation in general and legal interpretation in particular. Considering the fact that legal interpretation as an authentic process may render pleasure type consequences, the author concludes that the interpretation in the legal sense may and should be regarded as the artistic process, in addition to it being a scientific process. He provides the appropriate examples in defence of this position. One of these examples is the pleasure state of the quality legal interpretation performed orally by the lawyer in the court. A similar example may be a written interpretation provided by an interpreter in other settings. The feature of this interpretation should, however, be that it should render the pleasure state among the readers. The author also notes that the pleasure state as the result of legal interpretation should originate not in the nature of purely artistic action performed by the interpreter (spoken, written statement) but the origin of the artistic nature should be within the purely legal characteristics of the object of interpretation. | en_US |
| dc.identifier.citation | Звєрєв Є. О. До питання про визнання юридичного тлумачення мистецтвом / Звєрєв Є. О. // Наукові записки НаУКМА. Юридичні науки. - 2017. - Т. 193. - С. 38-40. | uk_UA |
| dc.identifier.uri | https://ekmair.ukma.edu.ua/handle/123456789/12456 | |
| dc.language.iso | uk | uk_UA |
| dc.relation.source | Наукові записки НаУКМА: Юридичні науки | uk_UA |
| dc.status | first published | uk_UA |
| dc.subject | юридичне тлумачення | uk_UA |
| dc.subject | мистецтво | uk_UA |
| dc.subject | наука | uk_UA |
| dc.subject | legal interpretation | en_US |
| dc.subject | art | en_US |
| dc.subject | science | en_US |
| dc.subject | стаття | uk_UA |
| dc.title | До питання про визнання юридичного тлумачення мистецтвом | uk_UA |
| dc.title.alternative | Certain aspects of the recognition of legal interpretation as an art | en_US |
| dc.type | Article | uk_UA |