Volume 3, Issue 3
  • ISSN 2352-1805
  • E-ISSN: 2352-1813
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes


Sources of law are made up of terms that, amongst other things, mediate between facts and different results, and it is the role of lawyers to explain or justify why a particular interpretation or permutation of a given term should be taken in a given case. Such terms do not exist in isolation, but are hugely contextual and play an integral role in intermediating between different potential outcomes. Therefore, the skill of carefully applying and using legal terms is one of the primary focuses of legal education and calls for a consideration of the intricate role that legal terms play in legal argumentation. However, sometimes this endeavour in the law classroom is affected by the focus placed on the meaning of individual terms, as opposed to the broader role they have in legal reasoning and the analysis of legal outcomes. In considering this, this paper draws a contrast between the way in which students sometimes use different legal and moral terms in the various roles in their lives outside of the classrooms and within, and contends that one of the reasons for this is the greater liberty that they feel in using different terms outside of the classroom. This paper contends that, pedagogically, a similar level of independence can be achieved through the collaborative translation of legal concepts into abstract art, by enabling students to take greater co-ownership of legal language. Specifically, it argues that Wassily Kandinsky’s art theory, with its emphasis on the spirit and emotions, can provide an effective framework for this.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Brand, Juliane , and Christopher Hailey
    1997Constructive Dissonance: Arnold Schoenberg and the Transformations of Twentieth-Century Culture. Berkley, CA: University of California Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Campen, Crétien van
    1997 “Synesthesia and Artistic Experimentation.” Psyche3 (6). www.theassc.org/files/assc/2290.pdf.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Carlson, Maria
    2015No Religion Higher Than Truth: A History of the Theosophical Movement in Russia, 1875–1922. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. doi: 10.1515/9781400872794
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400872794 [Google Scholar]
  4. Carneiro, Maria Francisca , Eliseu Raphael Venturi , and Laércio A. Becker
    2014 “What is the Smell of Law? First Assumptions for the Semiotics of Juridical ‘Matter’. Social Sciences Research Network (SSRN), October6 2014 https://ssrn.com/abstract=2506265 or doi:10.2139/ssrn.2506265 doi: 10.2139/ssrn.2506265
    https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2506265 [Google Scholar]
  5. Criminal Justice Act
    Criminal Justice Act 1967 London: Her Majesty’s Stationery Office. www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1967/80/pdfs/ukpga_19670080_en.pdf.
  6. DeGroff, Eric A.
    2012 “Training Tomorrow’s Lawyers: What Empirical Research Can Tell Us About the Effect of Law School Pedagogy on Law Student Learning Styles.” Southern Illinois University Law Journal, 251: 251–254.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Easteal, Patricia
    2008 “Teaching about the Nexus between Law and Society: From Pedagogy to Andragogy.” Legal Education Review18 (1&2): 163–172.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Feliú, Vicenç , and Helen Frazer
    2012 “Outcomes Assessment and Legal Research Pedagogy.” Legal Reference Services Quarterly31 (2): 188–203. doi: 10.1080/0270319X.2012.682938
    https://doi.org/10.1080/0270319X.2012.682938 [Google Scholar]
  9. Gordon, Sara
    2013 “Through the Eyes of Jurors: The Use of Schemas in the Application of ‘Plain-Language’ Jury Instructions.” Hastings Law Journal64 (3): 643–678.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Hubbard, Edward M. , and Vilayanur S. Ramachandran
    2005 “Neurocognitive Mechanisms of Synaesthesia.” Neuron48 (3): 509–520. doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2005.10.012
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2005.10.012 [Google Scholar]
  11. Jakobson, Roman
    1959 “On Linguistic Aspects of Translation.” InOn Translation, ed. by Reuben Arthur Brower , 30–39. Cambridge. MA: Harvard University Press. doi: 10.4159/harvard.9780674731615.c18
    https://doi.org/10.4159/harvard.9780674731615.c18 [Google Scholar]
  12. Kandinsky, Wassily
    1979Point and Line to Plane: Contribution to the Analysis of the Pictorial Elements. Translated by Howard Dearstyne and Hilla Rebay . New York: Dover.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. 2011Concerning the Spiritual in Art. Translated with an introduction by Michael T. H. Sadler . New York: Dover.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Lindahl, Lars
    2004 “Deduction and Justification in the Law: The Role of Legal Terms and Concepts.” Ratio Juris17 (2): 182–202. doi: 10.1111/j.1467‑9337.2004.00263.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9337.2004.00263.x [Google Scholar]
  15. Lynch, Mary A.
    2011 “An Evaluation of Ten Concerns About Using Outcomes in Legal Education.” William Mitchell Law Review38 (3): 986–1016.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Macagno, Fabrizio
    2010 “Definitions in Law.” Bulletin Suisse de Linguistique Appliquée2: 199–217.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. O’Sullivan, Simon
    2001 “The Aesthetics of Affect: Thinking Art Beyond Representation.” Angelaki: Journal of Theoretical Humanities6 (3): 125–135. doi: 10.1080/09697250120087987
    https://doi.org/10.1080/09697250120087987 [Google Scholar]
  18. Philippopoulos-Mihalopoulos, Andreas
    2015Spatial Justice: Body, Lawscape, Atmosphere. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Poling, Clark V.
    1986Kandinsky’s Teaching at the Bauhaus. New York: Rizzoli.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Regina v Woollin
    Regina v Woollin (1998) Judgments, 22July 1998 London: UK House of Lords. https://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld199798/ldjudgmt/jd980722/wool.htm.
  21. Ringbom, Sixten
    1966 “Art in ‘The Epoch of the Great Spiritual’: Occult Elements in the Early Theory of Abstract Painting.” Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes29: 386–418. doi: 10.2307/750725
    https://doi.org/10.2307/750725 [Google Scholar]
  22. Sartor, Giovanni
    2008 “Legal Concepts: An Inferential Approach.” European University Institute Law Working PaperNo.2008/03. San Domenico di Fiesole: Department of Law, European University Institute. https://ssrn.com/abstract=1093627. doi: 10.2139/ssrn.1093627
    https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1093627 [Google Scholar]
  23. Scruton, Roger
    1998Art and Imagination: A Study in the Philosophy of Mind. South Bend, IN: St Augustine’s Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Shusterman, Richard
    2000Pragmatic Ethics: Living, Beauty, Rethinking Art. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Spaak, Torben
    2014 “Alf Ross on the Concept of a Legal Right.” Ratio Juris27 (4): 461–476. doi: 10.1111/raju.12054
    https://doi.org/10.1111/raju.12054 [Google Scholar]
  26. Tomas, Vincent
    1969 “Kandinsky’s Theory of Painting.” The British Journal of Aesthetics9 (1): 19–38. doi: 10.1093/bjaesthetics/9.1.19
    https://doi.org/10.1093/bjaesthetics/9.1.19 [Google Scholar]
  27. Zalesne, Deborah , and David Nadvorney
    2011 “Why Don’t They Get It: Academic Intelligence and the Under-Prepared Student as Other.” Journal of Legal Education61 (2): 264–279.
    [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): intersemiotic translation; Kandinsky; law; legal language; legal pedagogy
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error