Hat mellan raderna: en diskursanalytisk studie av hur svenska domstolar konstruerar hatmotiv
(2026) RÄSK02 20261Sociology of Law Department
- Abstract
- This study examines how hate motives are constructed through a linguistic phrasing in
Swedish criminal court judgments from a sociology of law perspective. The aim is to
analyze how courts as institutional actors produce and reproduce legal meaning of hate
motives through juridical discourse. The study applies a qualitative discourse analytical
approach with a linguistic focus and grounded in a social constructionist perspective.
From a social constructionist viewpoint, legal meanings are understood as socially and
linguistically produced rather than objectively given. The empirical material for this
study consists of 41 Swedish criminal judgements between 1994-2026. The analysis
focuses on recurring linguistic patterns, structures... (More) - This study examines how hate motives are constructed through a linguistic phrasing in
Swedish criminal court judgments from a sociology of law perspective. The aim is to
analyze how courts as institutional actors produce and reproduce legal meaning of hate
motives through juridical discourse. The study applies a qualitative discourse analytical
approach with a linguistic focus and grounded in a social constructionist perspective.
From a social constructionist viewpoint, legal meanings are understood as socially and
linguistically produced rather than objectively given. The empirical material for this
study consists of 41 Swedish criminal judgements between 1994-2026. The analysis
focuses on recurring linguistic patterns, structures and forms of discursive silence in the
courts' reasoning about hate crime.
The findings demonstrate that courts construct hate motives through varying degrees of
linguistic certainty, explicitness and contextual interpretation. The results indicate that
juridical discourse contributes to establishing boundaries for what becomes legally
recognizable as hate. Certain discriminatory expressions and identities are given
stronger legal relevance while other potential hate motives are being marginalized or
left unaddressed through forms of discursive silence. Differences between district court
and court of appeal illustrate how legal meanings are negotiated and reformulated
within the juridical process.
The findings suggest how courts can be understood as active meaning-making
institutions that continuously shape and reproduce legal understandings of hate motives
within the Swedish legal system. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
https://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/9243893
- author
- Johansson, Angelina LU and Johansson, Mikaela
- supervisor
- organization
- course
- RÄSK02 20261
- year
- 2026
- type
- M2 - Bachelor Degree
- subject
- keywords
- diskursanalys, domstolar, hatbrott, hatmotiv, socialkonstruktivism
- language
- Swedish
- id
- 9243893
- date added to LUP
- 2026-08-05 12:10:08
- date last changed
- 2026-08-05 12:10:08
@misc{9243893,
abstract = {{This study examines how hate motives are constructed through a linguistic phrasing in
Swedish criminal court judgments from a sociology of law perspective. The aim is to
analyze how courts as institutional actors produce and reproduce legal meaning of hate
motives through juridical discourse. The study applies a qualitative discourse analytical
approach with a linguistic focus and grounded in a social constructionist perspective.
From a social constructionist viewpoint, legal meanings are understood as socially and
linguistically produced rather than objectively given. The empirical material for this
study consists of 41 Swedish criminal judgements between 1994-2026. The analysis
focuses on recurring linguistic patterns, structures and forms of discursive silence in the
courts' reasoning about hate crime.
The findings demonstrate that courts construct hate motives through varying degrees of
linguistic certainty, explicitness and contextual interpretation. The results indicate that
juridical discourse contributes to establishing boundaries for what becomes legally
recognizable as hate. Certain discriminatory expressions and identities are given
stronger legal relevance while other potential hate motives are being marginalized or
left unaddressed through forms of discursive silence. Differences between district court
and court of appeal illustrate how legal meanings are negotiated and reformulated
within the juridical process.
The findings suggest how courts can be understood as active meaning-making
institutions that continuously shape and reproduce legal understandings of hate motives
within the Swedish legal system.}},
author = {{Johansson, Angelina and Johansson, Mikaela}},
language = {{swe}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{Hat mellan raderna: en diskursanalytisk studie av hur svenska domstolar konstruerar hatmotiv}},
year = {{2026}},
}