Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T09:46:35.407Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

An e-mail from Global Bukowina1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 November 2007

David Nelken
David Nelken*
Affiliation:
University of Macerata, Italy; University of wales, Cardiff.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper uses Teubner’s reinterpretation of Ehrlich’s idea of ‘living law’ in his paper on ‘Global Bukowina’ as a test case of what is involved in making a classical author speak to current issues. It argues that interpretation is a form of appropriation and that the process of re-contextualising ideas involves an unstable compromise between establishing what an author meant and what an author means.

Type
Research Article
Information
International Journal of Law in Context , Volume 3 , Issue 3 , September 2007 , pp. 189 - 202
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2007

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Baudrillard, Jean (1994) Simulacra and Simulation. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Cohen, Morris Raphael (1912–1914) ‘Recent philosophical – legal literature in French, German, and Italian’, International Journal of Ethics 26: 528–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, Morris Raphael (1936) ‘On Absolutisms in Legal Thought’, University of Pennsylvania Law Review 84: 681–715.Google Scholar
Dezalay, Yves and Garth, Bryant (1996) Dealing in Virtue. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Dong, Ji Wei (1989) ‘Sociology of Law in China: Overview and Trends’, Law and Society Review 23(5): 903–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friedman, Lawrence (1986) ‘The Law and Society Movement’, Stanford Law Review 763–80.Google Scholar
Gadamer, Hans George, (1975) Truth and Method. New York: Seabury Press.Google Scholar
Hertogh, M. (ed.) (forthcoming) Re-Discovering Ehrlich. Oxford: Hart Publishing.Google Scholar
Krygier, Martin (1986) ‘Law as Tradition’, Law and Philosophy 5: 237–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Michaels, Ralf (2005) ‘The Re-Statement of Non-State Law: The State, Choice of Law, and the Challenge from Global Legal Pluralism’, Wayne Law Review 51: 1209.Google Scholar
Mathiesen, Thomas (2005) ‘Lex Vigilatoria – Towards a control system without a state?’, Essays for civil liberties and democracy, European Civil Liberties Network, available at www.ecln.org/essays/essay-7.pdf.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nelken, David (1981) ‘The Gap Problem in the Sociology of Law’, Windsor Yearbook of Aceess to Justice 35–62.Google Scholar
Nelken, David (1982) ‘Is there a crisis in law and legal ideology?’, British Journal of Law and Society 9: 177–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nelken, David (1984) ‘Law in Action or Living Law? Back to the Beginning in Sociology of Law’, Legal Studies 4: 157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nelken, David, (1987) ‘Changing Paradigms in the Sociology of Law’, in Teubner, G. (ed.), Autopoietic Law: A New Approach to Law and Society. Berlin: De Gruyter, pp. 191–217.Google Scholar
Nelken, David (2001a) ‘Law’s Embrace’, Social and Legal Studies 3: 444–60.Google Scholar
Nelken, David (2001b) ‘Beyond the Metaphor of Legal Transplants?: Consequences of Autopoietic Theory for the Study of Cross – Cultural Legal Adaptation’, in Priban, J. and Nelken, D. (eds.), Law’s New Boundaries: The Consequences of Legal Autopoiesis. Aldershot: Dartmouth, pp. 265–302.Google Scholar
Nelken, David (2006) ‘Signaling Conformity: Changing Norms in Japan and China’, Michigan Journal of International Law 27: 933–72.Google Scholar
Nelken, David (2008) ‘Eugen Ehrlich, Living Law, and Plural Legalities’, Theoretical lnquiries in Law 9: 2.Google Scholar
Pound, Roscoe (1936/1962) ‘Introduction’ to E. Ehrlich, Fundamental Principles of the Sociology of Law (Moll, W. L., trans.). New York: Russell and Russell.Google Scholar
Pound, Roscoe (1938) ‘Fifty Years of Jurisprudence’, Harvard Law Review 51: 777–812.Google Scholar
Renner, Karl (1949) The Institutions of Private Law and their Social Function. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Rheinstein, Max, (1938) ‘Sociology of Law, Apropos Moll’s translation of Eugen Ehrlich’s Grundlegung der soziologie des Rechts’, Journal of Ethics 48: 232–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Street, Paul (2003) ‘Stabilizing flows in the legal field: Illusions of permanence, intellectual property rights and the transnationalisation of law’, Global Networks 3: 7–28.Google Scholar
Teubner, Gunther (1989) ‘How the Law Thinks’, Law and Society Review 23: 727–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Teubner, Gunther (1997) ‘Global Bukowina: Legal Pluralism in the World Society’, in Teubner, G. (ed.), Global Law without a State. Aldershot: Dartmouth, pp. 3–28.Google Scholar
Vinogradoff, Paul (1920) ‘The Crisis of Modern Jurisprudence’, Yale Law Journal 29: 312–20.Google Scholar
Ziegert, Kurt Alex (1979) ‘The Sociology behind Eugen Ehrlich’s Sociology of Law’, International Journal of the Sociology of Law 7: 225.Google Scholar
Ziegert, Kurt Alex (2001) ‘Introduction’, to Eugen Ehrlich, The Fundamental Principles of Sociology of Law. New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers: 19–44.Google Scholar