Abstract

The research of a middle course between interpretative legal formalism and interpretative legal scepticism is one of the main characteristics of the contemporary debate on legal interpretation. The difficulty of finding this space in the midst is due a) to the lack of a proper reflection on the link between theory of interpretation and theory of meaning and b) to the unaware acceptance of an unsuited theory of meaning. Either formalism or scepticism presuppose a static conception of meaning: meaning is found or created at one go. To be considered a valid alternative to these two extremes, an intermediate theory of legal interpretation should propose a dynamic approach to meaning. In this paper it will be presented an intermediate theory of legal interpretation grounded on a dynamic theory of meaning