（Abstract）

This article begins with two routine cases，in which the court made different decisions because it held that the causes of action of the two cases are different. From the perspective of the key words in the judiciary，this paper discusses the following questions：how the relationship between words and social facts in the judiciary is constructed，and how social facts are defined. Furthermore，there is a question of how the social facts are adopted into the legal categories，and how these categories affect the social everyday life in turn.

The paper takes the key words in the civil jurisdiction as an example，which is one part of the “List of Key Words of the People’s Court’s Official Documents” published by the Supreme People’s Court，and discusses the cause of actionin adjudication. The cause of action is the name that the law gives to typicalsocial facts. This naming establishes the relationship between an object and aword，and the base of this construction is that this name is necessarily differentfrom other names. The unique significance of this naming becomes apparent inconnection with different kinds of naming.

Looking at this from the point of the normative document published by the Supreme People’s Court，the role of the main legal terms is mainly embodied in thecreation of court archives. However，during the process of adjudication the function of these key words goes far beyond this pure creation of public documents.This function is primarily embodied in specific procedures. Namely by determiningthe nature of the offence，and then categorize the offence according to its nature，and then decide in which court to initiate adjudication. Furthermore，thekey words in the judiciary can significantly affect the substantive result of thecase.

In the everyday life，even without a legal language，people can communicateand understand each other easily. The system of meanings in social life wouldnot be in disorder because of the lack of a legal language. The reasons for theemergence of key legal words are as follows：1. the limitations of ordinary language；2. the pursuit of the unity of a legal system in a country；3. the appearance and the fast development of legal community.

One characteristic of the application of ordinary language is that it always lends support from specific circumstances，and expresses the specific circumstances and facts of the interaction between the parties to a case. Therefore，inlaw，the vagueness and the ambiguity of the ordinary language must be removed，and by using an accurate legal language，one can make the judicial work organizeits activities on the basis these key words，categorizing and formalizing litigations. Thus，because there is no need to differentiate and analyze the meaningof ordinary language，it can guarantee the efficiency of the judicial work. Onanother hand，everyday language is generally localized. The level of rationalization in modern society has reached its historical high-point，and within the framework of formalistic rational law，local knowledge appears to be irrational，disorderly and scattered，and conflicts with the logos that embodies the powers of rationality and the pursuit of uniformity and totality. Through classifying，renaming and organizing the activities among people，the legal key words keep all the activities in one uniform system. The power to do this naming is held by thestate，thus it is compulsory and cannot permit any other system of classificationto resist it. This changed aspects of the numerous and complicated situationsof the local knowledge.

The reason why the legal key words are required by the practice of state government is that the state has a close relationship with the rise of the legal profession. After the professionalization of the law，and in order for the legalprofessionals to obtain an appropriate professional position，they have to driveeveryday language out of the field of law and separate the legal profession from other professions. Therefore，the social facts had to be renamed and the social life must be reorganized through key words.

The role of key legal terms towards the judiciary is mainly expressed through the unification of the form of litigation and to organize the procedural activities. The effect on the society is mainly the objectification and standardization of social facts，and even to directly construct certain social facts.

During the judicial process，legal key words construct a contextual framework for the activities between judges and litigants. They define the issues of the case，and any facts irrelevant to the case will not enter the domain of the hearing. Thus，key legal terms reduce the pluralistic and complicated world to ascope that can be understood by human rationality. They create a independent legal world originating in the real world，but which has a different logic from thelatter. We may say key legal words provide the power for making the society rational and programmed.

It is through placing different social facts under the different key legalwords that the law and the judiciary have the chance to make social facts increasingly rational and typified. By removing all the context of specific social facts，they are endowed with this power. In the field of key legal words，there isno history and no space. What exists is the pure meaning，and this meaning isboth legal and professional.

Key legal words define social facts，and the between the key work and social fact there exists a word/matter relationship. This question can basically betraced to the relationship between the name and the fact. In the past，it was believed that the relationship between the name and the fact is a corresponding relationship. The word is transparent，the meaning of the word is objective and isthe only media and agent for the meaning. In the modern judiciary，the meaningof “fact” is very weak，it is necessary for the judiciary to abstract the natureof the activities and use one key legal word to denote it. What the law then should pay attention to are only the key legal words，the law will not take it intoaccount every detail of a specific activity，because they are insignificant to the judiciary. The social facts，which are defined by key legal words，are only the typical social facts that are required by the law.

Key legal words are just a way of putting social facts in order. Only through the judiciary，will they have an actual effect on the format of social facts.In trial practice，legal facts and social facts interlace，and even unify underthe function of key legal words. It is a hard and long process for the judiciary to format social facts.

At the end of the paper，it explores the function key legal words have in constructing social facts. In the sense of the structuralism，language is not only a tool；the language controls people and not vice versa. Although key legalwords is only a symbol system of the combination of what is indicated and what canbe indicated，but they have the power to reconstruct social life. To exemplifyby juristic action of right in rein，in modern society，the symbolsare generally words without meaning，they completely refer to themselves，and their functionto create realization is even stronger. In the modern society，there is an abstract relationship between what is indicated and what can be indicated，and key legal words have such a self-reference situation as well.

Language is an existential fact for mankind，it is destiny and unchangeable. Everyone is placed within a language at birth. He has neither chance to changenor choice in the matter. He has to abide by the linguistic system and grammatical rules of by which he lives and thinks. Legal terms have the same effect onthe legal practitioners. For a lawyer，what is important is to find the authenticsocial facts overshadowed by language to touch and enter the truth of social life.

Translated by Xie Hongfei

Edited by Otto Malmgren