In this paper student Case Notes are analysed to exemplify the degrees of linguistic intricacy that come into play within the context of legal discourse – the ‘target discourse1-and to demonstrate that apprenticeship into this particular academic discourse community involves more than familiarisation with content specific material on the one hand and the control of common English structural conventions on the other. The discussion sets out to show that the intricate and often ‘hidden’ (as in ‘not made explicit’) linguistic demands academic discourses impose on NESB students need to be brought out into the open to highlight and clarify the association between specific lexicogrammatical realisations and generic meanings in the discourse. The paper concludes by emphasising the need for linguistically informed assistance for NESB learners at the tertiary level.
2010. A Multi-perspective Genre Analysis of the Barrister’s Opinion: Writing Context, Generic Structure, and Textualization. Written Communication 27:4 ► pp. 410 ff.
Hartig, Alissa J.
2016. Conceptual blending in legal writing: Linking definitions to facts. English for Specific Purposes 42 ► pp. 66 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 21 february 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers.
Any errors therein should be reported to them.