Introduction published in:
Legal Pragmatics
Edited by Dennis Kurzon and Barbara Kryk-Kastovsky
[Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 288] 2018
► pp. 118
References

References

Archer, Dawn
2005Questions and Answers in the English Courtroom (1640–1760). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Arnovick, Leslie
1999Diachronic Pragmatics. (Pragmatics and Beyond New Series 68). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Austin, John
1995 [1832]The Province of Jurisprudence Determined, W. Rumble (ed.), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Austin, J. L.
1962How to Do Things with Words, Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Berk-Seligson, Susan
1999 “The Impact of Court Interpreting on the Coerciveness of Leading Questions.” Forensic Linguistics6.1: 30–56.Google Scholar
Bertucelli-Papi, Marcella
2000 “Is a Diachronic Speech Act Theory Possible?Journal of Historical Pragmatics 1(1): 57–66. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bhatia, Vijay, Christopher N. Candlin and Maurizio Gotti
(eds.) 2003Legal Discourse in Multilingual and Multicultural Contexts. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Bhatia, Vijay, Christopher N. Candlin and Paola Evangelisti Allori
(eds.) 2008Language, Culture and the Law. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Bix, B.
1993Law, Language and Legal Determinacy. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Cole, Peter and Jerry Morgan
(eds.) 1975Syntax and Semantics 3: Speech Acts. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Collins, Daniel
2001Reanimated Voices. Speech Reporting in a Historical-Pragmatic Perspective. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Craun, Edwin David
1997Lies, Slander and Obscenity in Medieval English Literature. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Crystal, David and Derek Davy
1969Investigating English Style. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Culpeper, Jonathan, and Merja Kytö
2000a “Gender Voices in the Spoken Interaction of the Past: A Pilot Study Based on Early Modern English Trial Proceedings”. In The History of English in a Social Context, ed. by Dieter Kastovsky and Arthur Mettinger, 53–89. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2000b “Data in Historical Pragmatics: Spoken Interaction (Re)cast as Writing”. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 1(2): 175–199. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Danet, Brenda
1980 “Language in the Legal Process.” Law and Society Review, 14:3, 445–564. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1985 “Legal Discourse”. In Handbook of Discourse Analysis, Teun A. van Dijk (ed.). 273–291. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Doty, Kathleen L.
2007 “Telling Tales: The Role of Scribes in Constructing the Discourse of the Salem Witchcraft Trials.” Journal of Historical Pragmatics 8:1, 25–41. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Doty, Kathleen, and Risto Hiltunen
2002 “ ‘I Will Tell, I Will Tell’: Confessional Patterns in the Salem Witchcraft Trials”. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 3(2): 299–335. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dworkin, Ronald
1986Law’s Empire. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Eades, Diana
2000 “ ‘I don’t Think it’s an Aanswer to the Question’: Silencing Aboriginal Witnesses in Court”. Language in Society, 29: 161–195. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ehrlich, Susan
2001Representing Rape: Language and Sexual Consent, London: Routledge. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gibbons, John
2003Forensic Linguistics: an Introduction to Language in the Justice System. Malden, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Gibbons, J. and M. Teresa Turrell
(eds.) 2008Dimensions of Forensic Linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Grice, H. P.
1975 “Logic and Conversation”. In Cole and Morgan, pp. 41–58.Google Scholar
Gudjonsson, Gisli H.
1991 “The “Notice to Detained Persons”, PACE Codes, and Reading Ease.” Applied Cognitive Psychology 5: 89–95. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hancher, Michael
1979 “The Classification of Cooperative Illocutionary Acts”. Language in Society, Vol. 8/1: 1–14 CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1980 “Speech Acts and the Law”. In Language Use and the Uses of Language, ed. by Roger Shuy and Anna Shnukal, 245–256. Georgetown: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Hart, H.
1961The Concept of the Law. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hiltunen, Risto
1996 “’Tell me, be you a Witch?’: Questions in the Salem Witchcraft Trials of 1692.” International Journal for the Semiotics of Law, 9:1, 17–37. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hope, Jonathan
1993 “Second Person Singular Pronouns in Records of Early Modern ‘Spoken’ English”. Neophilologische Mitteilungen 94: 83–100.Google Scholar
Jucker, Andreas
(ed.) 1995Historical Pragmatics: Developments in the History of English. (Pragmatics and Beyond New Series 35). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Jucker, Andreas and Irma Taavitsainen
2000 “Diachronic Speech Act Analysis: Insults from Flyting to Flaming”. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 1(1): 67–95. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kaplan, Lindsay
1997The Culture of Slander in Early Modern England. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kevelson, Roberta
1982 “Language and Legal Speech Acts: Decisions.” In Linguistics and the Professions, ed. by Robert J. Di Pietro, 121–131. Norwood: Ablex.Google Scholar
Koch, Peter
1999 “Court Records and Cartoons: Reflections on Spontaneous Dialogue in Early Romance Texts”. In Historical Dialogue Analysis, ed. by Andreas Jucker, Gerd Fritz and Franz Lebsanft, 399–429. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kryk-Kastovsky, Barbara
2000 “Representations of Orality in Early Modern English Trial Records”. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 1(2): 201–230. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kryk-Kastovksy, B.
2006 “Impoliteness in Early Modern English Courtroom Discourse.” Journal of Historical Pragmatics, 7(2): 213–243. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kurzon, D.
1986It is Hereby Performed…: Explorations in Legal Speech Acts. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kurzon, Dennis
1992 “When Silence may Mean Power.” Journal of Pragmatics, 18(1): 92–95. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1995 “The Right of Silence: A Socio-Pragmatic Model of Interpretation”. Journal of Pragmatics, 23(1): 55–69. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1996 “To Speak or not to Speak: The Comprehensibility of the Revised Police Caution (PACE)”, International Journal for the Semiotics of Law, 9(25): 3–16. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2001 “The Politeness of Judges: American and British Judicial Behavior”. Journal of Pragmatics, 33: 61–85. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2016 “The Three Silences of Sir Thomas More: A Pragmatic Perspective”. Journal of Historical Pragmatics, 17:1, 107–128.Google Scholar
Labov, William
1972Sociolinguistic Patterns. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Lakoff, Robin
1990Talking Power: The Politics of Language. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Leo, R. A. and Thomas, G. C.
(eds.) 1998The Miranda Debate: Law, Justice and Policing, Boston: Northeastern UP.Google Scholar
Levi, Judith N., and Ann Graffam Walker
(eds.) 1900Language in the Judicial Process. New York: Plenum.Google Scholar
Luchjenbroers, June
1997“In your Own Words…”. Questions and Answers in a Supreme Court trial. Journal of Pragmatics 27: 477–503. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Marmor, Andrei
2008 “The Pragmatics of Legal Language.” Ratio Juris. Vol. 21: 4, 423–52. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
McEwan, Robert and Phillip Lewis
1967Gatley on Libel and Slander. London: Sweet and Maxwell.Google Scholar
Mellinkoff, David
1963Language of the Law. Boston: Little, Brown.Google Scholar
Moore, Colette
2002 “Reporting Direct Speech in Early Modern Slander Depositions”. In Studies in the History of the English Language. A Millennial Perspective, Donka Minkova and Robert Stockwell (eds.), 399–416. Berlin: Mouton. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Mowat, Christine
1999A Plain Language Handbook for Legal Writers. Scarborough, ON: Carsell.Google Scholar
Olivecrona, Karl
1971 [1939]Law as Fact. London: Stevens.Google Scholar
Peška, Zdeněk
1039“Jazýk Zákonodárcův” (“The Language of Lgislators”). Slovo a Slovesnost 5: 32–40.Google Scholar
Reinach, Adolph
1913Die apriorischen Grundlagen des bürgerlichen Rechtes (“The A-priori Foundations of Civil Law”). https://​www​.sdvigpress​.org​/dox​/102960​/101093​.pdf; accessed on November 17, 2017
Romaine, Suzanne
1982Socio-Historical Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sacks, H., E. A. Schegloff and G. Jefferson
1976 “A Simplest Systematics for the Organization of Turn-Taking for Conversation.” Language 50: 696–735. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Searle, John
1975 “Indirect Speech Acts”. In Cole and Morgan, pp. 59–82.Google Scholar
1979 “A Taxonomy of Illocutionary Acts”. In Expression and Meaning: Studies in the Theory of Speech Acts, 1–19. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Tieken-Boon van Ostade, Ingrid
2000 “Sociohistorical linguistics and the observer’s paradox”. In The History of English in a Social Context, ed. by Dieter Kastovsky and Arthur Mettinger, 441–461. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Tiersma, Peter
1999Legal Language. Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
Trosborg, Anna
1995 “Statutes and Contracts: An Analysis of Legal Speech Acts in the English Language of the Law.” Journal of Pragmatics, 25(1): 31–53. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Williams, Christopher
2005Tradition and Change in Legal English: Verbal Constructions In Prescriptive Texts. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Witczak-Plisiecka, Iwona
2009 “A Linguistic-Pragmatic Note on Indeterminacy in Legal Language”. Linguistica Copernicana 1(1): 231–243.Google Scholar
2013From Speech Acts to Speech Actions. Łódź: Łódź University Press.Google Scholar
Wittgenstein, Ludwig
1976 [1953]Philosophical investigations. Trans. G. E. M. Anscombe. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Wright, Laura
1995 “Syntactic Structure of Witnesses’ Narratives from the Sixteenth Century Court Minute Books of the Royal Hospitals of Bridewell and Bedlam”. Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 96(1): 93–105.Google Scholar
2000 “On the Construction of Some Early Modern English Courtroom Narratives”. In English Diachronic Pragmatics, ed. by Gabriella Di Martino and Maria Lima, 79–102. Napoli: CUEN.Google Scholar