На основі проведених етимологічного та семантичного аналізу слів «правотворчість» і «нормотворчість» здійснено спробу подолати термінологічну невизначеність загальнотеоретичної категорії, що відображає діяльність уповноважених суб’єктів права зі створення, зміни чи скасування правових норм. Наведено аргументи на користь уживання в правовій доктрині юридичних термінів «правотворчісь» і «нормотворчість» як таких, що несуть у собі неоднакове смислове навантаження.
The author, on the basis of conducted etymological and semantic analysis of the words "lawmaking" and "rulemaking", tried to overcome the terminological uncertainty of the general theoretical category, which reflects the activity of authorized subjects of the right to create, change or abolish legal norms. The arguments in favor of the use in the legal doctrine of the legal terms "lawmaking" and "rule-making" as those that bear the unequal semantic load are given.
It is noted that the terms "lawmaking" and "rule-making" are close in their meaning, which is confirmed by their functional aspect, expressed by the word "creativity". At the same time, the teleological (or effective) aspect of such creativity is the reason for their delineation. The purpose of law-making is the creation of legal norms, and for the purpose of rule-making - the creation of both legal and other varieties of social norms. In view of this fact, we consider methodologically correct use in educational and scientific
literature: a) the term "rule-making" for the verbal designation of a category that reflects such a phenomenon of social reality as the activity of a society or its separate segments (for example, corporations) for the creation, modification or cancellation social norms; b) the term "lawmaking" for the verbal designation of the concept that it reflects such a phenomenon of legal validity as the activity of authorized subjects of law to create, change or abolish legal norms.
