Legal radio serves as a core medium for legal popularization and public rule-of-law communication. The standardization, accuracy and neutrality of hosts’ pragmatic expression directly shape the communication effectiveness of legal information and the quality of public rule-of-law cognition construction. Currently, legal popularization broadcasts in China suffer from pragmatic deviations including dramatized narratives, colloquial terminology and emotional expressions, and have yet to form a standardized pragmatic system adapted to the attributes of rule-of-law communication. Drawing on theories of pragmatics, media discourse ethics and cross-cultural communication, this paper adopts comparative case study and discourse analysis. Taking CCTV rule-of-law radio programs and BBC rule-of-law special radio programs as research samples, it compares pragmatic differences between Chinese and British legal popularization programme hosts regarding narrative logic, terminology conversion, prosodic voice and value expression. This study further explores deep-seated causes stemming from institutional positioning, media functions and public legal literacy, and identifies core pragmatic dilemmas confronting domestic legal popularization broadcasting. Drawing on communication practices in China and the United Kingdom, this study constructs pragmatic expression norms for legal popularization broadcasting from four dimensions: terminology conversion systems, narrative discourse logic, broadcasting voice norms and professional training mechanisms. Balancing the professionalism of rule-of-law communication and the accessibility of mass communication, it offers theoretical support and practical pathways for high-quality rule-of-law communication and standardized broadcasting practice in the new era.

Li Yuhang. Pragmatic Norms for Hosts of Legal Popularization Programs: A Comparative Analysis of Chinese and British Rule-of-Law Radio Programs. Academic Journal of Humanities & Social Sciences (2026), Vol. 9, Issue 7: 38-44. https://doi.org/10.25236/AJHSS.2026.090705.

[1] Yao, X. D. (2024). Pragmatic research from the perspective of cognitive linguistics: A review of Introduction to Cognitive Pragmatics. Journal of Foreign Languages, 47(4), 114-119.

[2] Yang, L. K., & Li, B. J. (2022). Research on the normalization of film language paradigm in documentary cultural programs in the new media era: A case study of TV program Luoshen Water Fu. West China Broadcasting TV, 43(8), 1-3.

[3] B, S. (2006). Media and the path to peace. Journal of Peace Research, 43(2), 238. https://doi.org/10.1177/002234330604300229

[4] Du, J. B. (2003). On forensic linguistics research and its development. Journal of Guangdong University of Foreign Studies, (1), 14-17+22.

[5] Patrizia A, & Jan E. The digital (r)evolution of legal discourse: New genres, media, and linguistic practices. De Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783111048789

[6] Zhang, L. (2013). An analysis of cultural differences in cross-cultural communication of media texts. Journal of Guangxi University (Philosophy and Social Science Edition), 35(5), 115-119. 

[7] Tom B. Hybrid voices and collaborative change: Contextualising positive discourse analysis. Taylor and Francis. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203109373

[8] Dong, H. Y. (2013). A study on discourse styles of TV broadcasting. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Hunan University, Changsha, Hunan.