Contextual Meanings of Legal Terminology in Press Discourse: Metaphorization And Semantic Narrowing/Widening

Legal terminology is traditionally associated with semantic precision, conceptual stability, and institutional regulation. However, when legal terms migrate from codified legal texts into press discourse, they frequently undergo contextual semantic transformation. This article examines the contextual meanings of legal terminology in press discourse, with particular attention to metaphorization and semantic narrowing/widening as mechanisms of semantic modification. Drawing on a comparative corpus of English-language and Uzbek-language newspapers, the research applies an integrated framework combining terminology theory, lexical semantics, and discourse analysis. The findings demonstrate that legal terms in press discourse acquire layered meanings shaped by rhetorical, ideological, and communicative factors. Metaphorization intensifies narrative framing, semantic widening enables evaluative and ideological extension, and semantic narrowing facilitates accessibility through simplification. The study argues that contextual semantic transformation reflects discursive adaptation rather than terminological degradation. These results contribute to legal linguistics, media discourse studies, and contemporary terminology theory by illustrating the dynamic interplay between institutional legal meaning and media-mediated public communication.

Ҳали таржима қилинмаган