Distinctions between Interpretation and Construction.

 Distinctions between Interpretation and Construction.

Interpretation is the process of determining the linguistic and semantic meaning of a legal text, such as a statute, contract, or constitutional provision. Construction is the process of applying that ascertained meaning to a specific set of facts, especially when the text is ambiguous, vague, or has gaps. 

Here are ten key distinctions between interpretation and construction, including a practical example.

distinctions between interpretation and construction

Aspect	Interpretation	Construction
1. Purpose	Determines meaning: The primary goal is to find the linguistic meaning of the words in the text and what they communicate.	Determines legal effect: The goal is to apply the text's meaning to particular circumstances and establish its legal consequences.
2. Timing	Precedes construction: In a typical analysis, interpretation comes first. You must first understand what the text says before you can apply it.	Follows interpretation: Construction happens after the text's meaning is identified. It is used to resolve how that meaning applies to a specific legal problem.
3. Trigger	Clear or unclear text: Occurs whether the language is clear or ambiguous. The process is simply to find the true sense of the words.	Ambiguous or vague text: Arises primarily when the plain meaning of the text is unclear, challenged, or fails to resolve the issue at hand.
4. Nature of activity	Linguistic: Involves a linguistic and social skill, relying on the natural and ordinary meaning of words, grammar, and context.	Legal and logical: Moves beyond the text to apply legal principles, reason, and doctrines to draw conclusions and fill in gaps.
5. Scope of analysis	Narrow focus: Centers on the semantic content of the particular words and phrases within the text itself.	Broader context: Considers the larger legal framework, legislative intent, societal context, and legal principles to resolve issues.
6. Result	Discovering meaning: The outcome is an understanding of what the words of the text mean.	Formulating rules: The outcome is the establishment of a legal rule or standard to resolve the case.
7. Judicial role	Limited by the text: Judges are bound by the literal meaning of the words and the explicit terms of the law.	Judicial policy-making: Judges have more flexibility to create or extend rules to resolve ambiguities in line with legislative purpose.
8. Approach	Mechanical or rigid: The focus on the literal meaning can be more formulaic, such as using rules like the Literal Rule or Golden Rule.	Flexible and adaptable: Allows for a more purposive or consequential analysis to fit the context, such as the Mischief Rule.
9. Alteration of meaning	No modification: Does not alter the meaning of the law. It clarifies what the words already mean.	Can extend or narrow: May expand or limit the scope of the law to achieve a fair or logical result.
10. Ambiguity	Resolves ambiguity: The process of interpretation itself may clear up what was initially ambiguous through context.	Addresses vagueness: When interpretation fails, construction creates additional rules or standards to resolve true vagueness.

 

Example: "No vehicles in the park"

This classic example illustrates the difference between interpreting the meaning of words and constructing a legal rule.

Interpretation

• The text: A city ordinance states, "No vehicles in the park".
• The meaning: A linguistic interpretation would determine the ordinary meaning of the words "vehicle" and "park." This would lead to the understanding that cars, trucks, and motorcycles are forbidden.
• Applying meaning:
• A park ranger sees a family driving their car through the park.
• Interpretation: The car is a "vehicle."
• Result: The driver is violating the ordinance.

Construction

• The ambiguity: A different scenario presents itself: a monument is being built in the park, and a construction crew wants to bring a motorized construction vehicle into the area. Or, a parent pushes a baby in a motorized stroller. The plain meaning of "vehicle" does not clearly address these new situations.
• The process: A court must now use construction to determine the legal effect of the ordinance in these new circumstances. The court will consider the purpose of the law: to protect public safety and prevent pollution.
• Applying the law (construction):
• Construction vehicle: A court may conclude that the construction vehicle is allowed, as it serves a public purpose and the ordinance was not intended to prevent necessary park maintenance. The court is constructing a rule that carves out an exception based on the law's overall intent.
• Motorized stroller: A court may determine that a motorized stroller, despite fitting the literal definition of a "vehicle," is not the type of vehicle the ordinance was meant to prohibit. The court could construct a rule excluding this type of mobility device to avoid an absurd result that contradicts the law's purpose.