Целью настоящей работы является диахронический анализ языковых средств, маркирующих авторское присутствие в жанрах юридического дискурса. Осуществлен анализ факторов, способствовавших обезличиванию юридических жанров. В ходе анализа были выявлены три типа авторского присутствия в жанрах юридического дискурса: элиминация авторских следов; имплицитное присутствие автора; эксплицитное присутствие автора, несущего персональную ответственность за продуцируемые высказывания.

Akhmetova S. Diskursivnyi analiz sudebnykh dokumentov [Discourse analysis of judicial documents]. Bulletin of South Ural University. Law, 2016, vol. 16 (1), pp. 12–17.
Archer D. Questions and answers in the English courtroom (1640–1760). Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2005. 374 p.
Aristotel' Sochineniia [Collection of works: in 4 vol.]. Vol. 4. Moscow: Mysl', 1984. 830 p.
Bally Ch. Frantsuzskaia stilistika [French stylistics]. Moscow: Izdatel'stvo inostrannoi literatury, 1961. 393 p.
Barthes R. Izbrannye trudy: Semiotika. Poetika [Selected Works: Semiotics. Poetics]. Moscow: Progress: Univers, 1994. 616 p.
Biel Ł. The textual fit of translated EU law: A corpus-based study of deontic modality. The Translator, 2014, vol. 20 (3), pp. 332–355.
Boginskaya O. A contrastive study of deontic modality in parallel texts. ELOPE: English Language Overseas Perspectives and Enquiries, 2021, vol. 18 (2), pp. 31–49.
Boginskaya O. Competition – game – ritual: Three aspects of communicative interactions in the courtroom. Tomsk State University Journal of Philology, 2022, vol. 76, pp. 5–27.
Bondarko A. V. Teoriia znacheniia v sisteme funktsional'noi grammatiki [Theory of meaning in the system of functional grammar]. Moscow: Iazyki slavianskoi kul'tury, 2002. 736 p.
Breeze R. Lexical bundles across four legal genres. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 2013, vol. 18 (2), pp. 229–253.
Chaemsaithong K. Evaluative stancetaking in courtroom opening statements. Folia Linguistica, 2017, vol. 51(1), pp. 103–132.
Charter of Liberties. Available at: http://nhinet.org/ccs/docs/char-lib.htm (accessed: 15.09.2022).
Cheng L., Sha L., Zheng Y. A semiotic interpretation of legal terms. Contemporary Rhetoric, 2009, vol. 2, pp. 37–43.
Cotterill J. Language and Power in Court: A Linguistic Analysis of the O.J. Simpson Trial. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2003. 245 p.
Danet B. Orality, Literacy and Performativity in Anglo-Saxon Wills. Language and the Law. London; New York, 1994, pp. 100–135.
Deleuze G. Expressionism in philosophy: Spinoza. New York: Zone Books, 1992. 445 p.
Eades D. Sociolinguistics and the legal process. Bristol: Multilingual Matters, 2010. 303 p. Eco U. Otsutstvuiushchaia struktura. Vvedenie v semiologiiu [Missing Structure: An Introduction to Semiology]. St Petersburg: Petropolis, 1998. 544 p.
Felton Rosulek L. Dueling discourses: The construction of reality in closing arguments. New York: Oxford University Press, 2015. 248 p.
Foucault M. Volia k istine: po tu storonu znaniia, vlasti i seksual'nosti. Raboty raznykh let [The will to truth: beyond knowledge, power and sexuality. Works of different years]. Moscow: Kastal', 1996. 446 p.
Gotti M. Linguistic insights into legislative drafting. Theory and Practice of Legislation, 2014, vol. 2 (2), pp. 123–143.
Guntova E.V. Angliia v 14–15 vekakh [England in the 14th–15th centuries]. Middle Ages, 1987, no. 50, pp. 58–77.
Hansen M.B. Patterns of thanking in the closing section of UK service calls: Marking conversational macrostructure vs. interpersonal relations. Pragmatics and Society, 2006, vol. 7, pp. 664–692.
Heffer C. The Language of Jury Trial. A Corpus-aided Analysis of Legal-Lay Discourse. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2005. 253 p.
Last Will and Testament. Available at: https://templatelab.com/last-will-and-testament/ (accessed: 15.09.2022).
Luchitskaya S.I. Dva tela korolia. Ocherk politicheskoi teologii Srednevekov'ia. – Istoriia men-tal'nostei, istoricheskaia antropologiia. Zarubezhnye issledovaniia v obzorakh i referatakh [The two bodies of the king. Essay on the political theology of the Middle Ages. History of mentalities, historical anthropology: foreign research in reviews and abstracts]. Moscow: Rossiiskii gumanitarnyi universitet, 1996, pp. 142–154.
Magna Carta. Available at: https://www.bl.uk/magna-carta/articles/magna-carta (accessed: 15.09.2022).
Montesquieu Ch. L. O dukhe zakonov [On the spirit of laws]. Moscow: Mysl', 1999. 672 p.
Palashevskaya I. Correlations of status positions of courtroom discourse participants. XLingaue, 2017, vol. 10 (3), pp. 45–56.
Pishkova E., Lalayan S. Sudebnyi diskurs: iazykovye aspekty [Judicial verdicts as a form of implementation of legal discourse]. Humanities and social sciences, 2020, vol. 2, pp. 224–231.
Platon [Plato]. Works: in 4 volumes. Vol. 3. Moscow: Mysl', 1972. 620 p.
Pravikova L. Sudebnyi diskurs: lingvisticheskie aspekty [Judicial discourse: linguistic aspects]. Bulletin of Pyatigorsk State Linguistic University, 2003, vol. 3, pp. 42–46.
Sacrament act. Available at: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ (accessed: 15.09.2022).
Sarcevic S. New approach to legal translation. The Hague, Netherlands: Kluwer. Smith, 1997. 308 p.
Shatin Y., Silantev I. Rossiiskii sudebnyi diskurs v svete sovremennoi teorii argumentatsii [Russian Judicial Discourse in the Light of the Modern Theory of Argumentation]. Kritika and Semiotika [Critique & Semiotics], 2022, vol. 2, pp. 401–412.
Tiersma P. Legal Language. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1999.
Yang M., Wang M. A science mapping of studies on courtroom discourse with CiteSpace. International Journal of Legal Discourse, 2021, vol. 6 (2), pp. 291–322.
Wodak R. Language. Discourse. Politics. Volgograd: Peremena, 1997. 139 p.
Zaitseva M. Sudebnyi diskurs: rechevye strategii i taktiki, iazykovye sredstva vyrazheniia kon-flikta [Judicial discourse: speech strategies and tactics, language means of conflict expression]. Actual research in the modern world, 2019, vol. 4–6 (48), pp. 54–60.