G.M. Dobrov Institute for Scientific and Technological Potential and Science History Studies of the NAS of Ukraine

Nauka naukozn. 2017, 1(95): 3-21

Section: Science and Innovation-driven Development of Economy and Society
Language: Ukrainian
Abstract: The linguistic and statistical method for study of stylistic homogeneity of legal acts on science and technology activities in the context of scientometric analysis of science and technology policy is proposed. The method is tested on a database built for purpose of the study, including 163 legal acts from 136 countries that represent all the contemporary legal systems. It is shown that the variation coefficient for large structural units of legal texts with complex structure can act as the statistical measure for stylistic homogeneity of a legal act, whereas the range of its peak values can act the normative range for assessment of the need to correct textual change or additions made in large structural units of any enforced legal act, to ensure its stylistic homogeneity. The samples of legal acts are used to produce the measure of impact from change or additions made in legal acts on the stylistic homogeneity of a legal act, and to find the differences in the stylistic homogeneity of primary edition and current editions of legal acts with complex structure. The found statistical tendencies in the stylistic homogeneity of a legal act are representative for all the contemporary legal systems. The results from the study confirm the appropriateness of linguistic and statistical methods for analysis of legal acts on science and technology activities as part of the scientometric methodology.

Keywords: science and technology activities, legal act, legal text, structural unit of legal text, stylistic homogeneity of legal text.


  1. Vavilenkova, А.І. (2015). Methodological foundations for automatic analysis of logical-linguistic models of text documents. Mathematical Machines and Systems, 1, 65—71 [inUkrainian].
  2. Boublyk, S.H. (2015). Linguostatistical capabilities for making a comparative analysis of the Ukrainian law on science. Problems of science, issue 9—10, pp. 10—22.
  3. Hirsch, J.E. (2005). An Index to Quantify an Individual’s Research Output. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, 102, 16569—16572. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0507655102
  4. Mačutek, J. Popescu, I.-I., Altmann, G. (2007). Confidence Intervals and Tests for the H-Point and Related Text Characteristics. Glottometrics. 15, 45—52.
  5. Popescu, I.-I., Kelih, E. Altmann, G. (2009). Diversification of the Case. Glottometrics, 18, 32—39.
  6. Boublyk, S.H. (2016). Scientific Approach to Analysis of Legal Acts in Science and Technology Field. Science and Science of Science, 2, 26—39 [in Ukrianian].
  7. Legal systems in countries of the world. An encyclopedic directory. А.Ya. Sukharev (ed.). 3rd ed., revised and suppl. Moscow: NORMA, 2003, 976 p. [in Russian].
  8. Frascati Manual 2015: Guidelines for Collecting and Reporting Data on Research and Experimental Development. Retrieved from http://www.uis.unesco.org/ScienceTechnology/Documents/oecd-frascati-manual.pdf.
  9. The Global Innovation Index 2016. Winning with Global Innovation. Retrieved from http://www.wipo.int/edocs/pubdocs/en/wipo_pub_gii_2016.pdf
  10. Rules for drafting laws and essential requirements to legislative techniques: methodological recommendations. Kyiv: Chief legal department of the Office of Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, 2007, 32 p. [in Ukrainian].
  11. Kashanina, Т.V. (2011). Legal drafting methodology. 2nd ed., revised. Мoscow: Norma: INFRA-М, 496 [in Russian].
  12. Tsiborovskyi, O.M. Istomin, S.V., Soroka, V.M. (2011). Ways of systematizing the law of Ukraine in health protection sphere. Кyiv, 72 p. [in Ukrainian].

Full Text (PDF)