82018550 03 01 01 JB code JB John Benjamins Publishing Company 01 JB code P&bns 288 GE 15 9789027264077 06 10.1075/pbns.288 00 EA E133 10 01 JB code P&bns 02 JB code 0922-842X 02 288.00 01 02 Pragmatics & Beyond New Series Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 01 01 Legal Pragmatics Legal Pragmatics 1 B01 01 JB code 38302956 Dennis Kurzon Kurzon, Dennis Dennis Kurzon University of Haifa 2 B01 01 JB code 896302957 Barbara Kryk-Kastovsky Kryk-Kastovsky, Barbara Barbara Kryk-Kastovsky University of Vienna 01 eng 11 286 03 03 viii 03 00 278 03 24 JB code LIN.DISC Discourse studies 24 JB code LIN.FOR Forensic & legal linguistics 24 JB code LIN.PRAG Pragmatics 10 LAN009030 12 CFG 01 06 02 00 The volume Legal Pragmatics is a contribution to the interface between language and law. It looks at how the principles of language use can be beneficial to clarifying legal issues, its twelve chapters (together with the Introduction) offering a wide spectrum of the latest approaches to the area of legal pragmatics. 03 00 The volume Legal Pragmatics is a contribution to the interface between language and law. It looks at how the principles of language use can be beneficial to clarifying legal issues, its twelve chapters (together with the Introduction) offering a wide spectrum of the latest approaches to the area of legal pragmatics. The four chapters in the first section are devoted to historical pragmatics and take a diachronic look at old courtroom records. Written legal language is also the focus of the four chapters in the next section, dealing with the pragmatics of modern legal writing. The chapters in the third section, devoted to modern legal language, touch upon both the discourse in the courtroom and in police investigation. Finally, the two chapters in the last section on legal discourse and multilingualism address a topic very relevant to the modern era of globalisation -- the position of legal discourse in multilingual contexts. 01 00 03 01 01 D503 https://benjamins.com/covers/475/pbns.288.png 01 01 D502 https://benjamins.com/covers/475_jpg/9789027200716.jpg 01 01 D504 https://benjamins.com/covers/475_tif/9789027200716.tif 01 01 D503 https://benjamins.com/covers/1200_front/pbns.288.hb.png 01 01 D503 https://benjamins.com/covers/125/pbns.288.png 02 00 03 01 01 D503 https://benjamins.com/covers/1200_back/pbns.288.hb.png 03 00 03 01 01 D503 https://benjamins.com/covers/3d_web/pbns.288.hb.png 01 01 JB code pbns.288.int 06 10.1075/pbns.288.int 1 18 18 Introduction 1 01 04 Introduction Introduction 1 A01 01 JB code 824324874 Dennis Kurzon Kurzon, Dennis Dennis Kurzon University of Haifa 2 A01 01 JB code 20324875 Barbara Kryk-Kastovsky Kryk-Kastovsky, Barbara Barbara Kryk-Kastovsky University of Vienna 01 01 JB code pbns.288.p1 06 10.1075/pbns.288.p1 22 97 76 Section header 2 01 04 Part I. Historical pragmatics Part I. Historical pragmatics 01 01 JB code pbns.288.01dot 06 10.1075/pbns.288.01dot 21 40 20 Chapter 3 01 04 Chapter 1. Pleading for life Chapter 1. Pleading for life 01 04 Narrative patterns within legal petitions (Salem, 1692) Narrative patterns within legal petitions (Salem, 1692) 1 A01 01 JB code 126324876 Kathleen L. Doty Doty, Kathleen L. Kathleen L. Doty Humboldt State University (Arcata, California, USA) 01 01 JB code pbns.288.02joh 06 10.1075/pbns.288.02joh 41 64 24 Chapter 4 01 04 Chapter 2. "How came you not to cry out?" Chapter 2. “How came you not to cry out?” 01 04 Pragmatic effects of negative questioning in child rape trials in the Old Bailey Proceedings 1730-1798 Pragmatic effects of negative questioning in child rape trials in the Old Bailey Proceedings 1730–1798 1 A01 01 JB code 831324877 Alison J. Johnson Johnson, Alison J. Alison J. Johnson University of Leeds 01 01 JB code pbns.288.03kry 06 10.1075/pbns.288.03kry 65 80 16 Chapter 5 01 04 Chapter 3. Implicatures in Early Modern English courtroom records Chapter 3. Implicatures in Early Modern English courtroom records 1 A01 01 JB code 335324878 Barbara Kryk-Kastovsky Kryk-Kastovsky, Barbara Barbara Kryk-Kastovsky University of Vienna 01 01 JB code pbns.288.04kur 06 10.1075/pbns.288.04kur 81 98 18 Chapter 6 01 04 Chapter 4. Literal interpretation and political expediency Chapter 4. Literal interpretation and political expediency 01 04 The case of Thomas More The case of Thomas More 1 A01 01 JB code 108324879 Dennis Kurzon Kurzon, Dennis Dennis Kurzon University of Haifa 01 01 JB code pbns.288.p2 06 10.1075/pbns.288.p2 102 129 28 Section header 7 01 04 Part II. Pragmatics of legal writing and documents Part II. Pragmatics of legal writing and documents 01 01 JB code pbns.288.05azu 06 10.1075/pbns.288.05azu 101 116 16 Chapter 8 01 04 Chapter 5. Making legal language clear to legal laypersons Chapter 5. Making legal language clear to legal laypersons 1 A01 01 JB code 144324880 Sol Azuelos-Atias Azuelos-Atias, Sol Sol Azuelos-Atias University of Haifa 01 01 JB code pbns.288.06vis 06 10.1075/pbns.288.06vis 117 130 14 Chapter 9 01 04 Chapter 6. Interpreting or in legal texts Chapter 6. Interpreting or in legal texts 1 A01 01 JB code 899324881 Jacqueline Visconti Visconti, Jacqueline Jacqueline Visconti Universities of Genoa and Birmingham 01 01 JB code pbns.288.p3 06 10.1075/pbns.288.p3 134 227 94 Section header 10 01 04 Part III. Discourse in the courtroom and in police investigation Part III. Discourse in the courtroom and in police investigation 01 01 JB code pbns.288.07ain 06 10.1075/pbns.288.07ain 133 156 24 Chapter 11 01 04 Chapter 7. The nature of power and control in the interrogative patterns of selected Nigerian courtroom discourse Chapter 7. The nature of power and control in the interrogative patterns of selected Nigerian courtroom discourse 1 A01 01 JB code 3324882 Oluwasola A. Aina Aina, Oluwasola A. Oluwasola A. Aina Crawford University 2 A01 01 JB code 259324883 Anthony Elisha Anowu Anowu, Anthony Elisha Anthony Elisha Anowu University of Lagos, Nigeria 3 A01 01 JB code 10324884 Tunde Olusola Opeibi Opeibi, Tunde Olusola Tunde Olusola Opeibi University of Lagos, Nigeria 01 01 JB code pbns.288.08als 06 10.1075/pbns.288.08als 157 179 23 Chapter 12 01 04 Chapter 8. The language of Egyptian interrogations Chapter 8. The language of Egyptian interrogations 01 04 A study of suspects' resistance to implicatures and presuppositions in prosecution questions A study of suspects’ resistance to implicatures and presuppositions in prosecution questions 1 A01 01 JB code 287324885 Neveen Al Saeed Al Saeed, Neveen Neveen Al Saeed University of Leeds 01 01 JB code pbns.288.09arc 06 10.1075/pbns.288.09arc 181 201 21 Chapter 13 01 04 Chapter 9. Achieving influence through negotiation Chapter 9. Achieving influence through negotiation 01 04 An argument for developing pragmatic awareness An argument for developing pragmatic awareness 1 A01 01 JB code 50324886 Dawn Archer Archer, Dawn Dawn Archer Manchester Metropolitan University 2 A01 01 JB code 201324887 Rebecca Smithson Smithson, Rebecca Rebecca Smithson Manchester Metropolitan University 3 A01 01 JB code 471324888 Ian Kennedy Kennedy, Ian Ian Kennedy Sancus Solutions Ltd 01 01 JB code pbns.288.10nak 06 10.1075/pbns.288.10nak 203 227 25 Chapter 14 01 04 Chapter 10. "I really don't know because I'm stupid" Chapter 10. “I really don’t know because I’m stupid” 01 04 Unpacking suggestibility in investigative interviews Unpacking suggestibility in investigative interviews 1 A01 01 JB code 299324889 Ikuko Nakane Nakane, Ikuko Ikuko Nakane University of Melbourne 01 01 JB code pbns.288.p4 06 10.1075/pbns.288.p4 232 276 45 Section header 15 01 04 Part IV. Legal discourse and multilingualism Part IV. Legal discourse and multilingualism 01 01 JB code pbns.288.11sal 06 10.1075/pbns.288.11sal 231 256 26 Chapter 16 01 04 Chapter 11. On the balance between invariance and context-dependence Chapter 11. On the balance between invariance and context-dependence 01 04 Legal concepts and their environments Legal concepts and their environments 1 A01 01 JB code 370324890 Tarja Salmi-Tolonen Salmi-Tolonen, Tarja Tarja Salmi-Tolonen University of Turku 01 01 JB code pbns.288.12yan 06 10.1075/pbns.288.12yan 257 276 20 Chapter 17 01 04 Chapter 12. Contextuality of interpretation in non-monolingual jurisdictions Chapter 12. Contextuality of interpretation in non-monolingual jurisdictions 01 04 The Canadian experience The Canadian experience 1 A01 01 JB code 96324891 Diana Yankova Yankova, Diana Diana Yankova New Bulgarian University 01 01 JB code pbns.288.ind 06 10.1075/pbns.288.ind 277 278 2 Miscellaneous 18 01 04 Index Index 01 JB code JBENJAMINS John Benjamins Publishing Company 01 01 JB code JB John Benjamins Publishing Company 01 https://benjamins.com Amsterdam NL 00 John Benjamins Publishing Company Marketing Department / Karin Plijnaar, Pieter Lamers onix@benjamins.nl 04 01 00 20180426 C 2018 John Benjamins D 2018 John Benjamins 02 WORLD 13 15 9789027200716 WORLD 03 01 JB 17 Google 03 https://play.google.com/store/books 21 01 00 Unqualified price 00 95.00 EUR 01 00 Unqualified price 00 80.00 GBP 01 00 Unqualified price 00 143.00 USD 331018326 03 01 01 JB code JB John Benjamins Publishing Company 01 JB code P&bns 288 Hb 15 9789027200716 06 10.1075/pbns.288 13 2018002593 00 BB 08 640 gr 10 01 JB code P&bns 02 0922-842X 02 288.00 01 02 Pragmatics & Beyond New Series Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 01 01 Legal Pragmatics Legal Pragmatics 1 B01 01 JB code 38302956 Dennis Kurzon Kurzon, Dennis Dennis Kurzon University of Haifa 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/38302956 2 B01 01 JB code 896302957 Barbara Kryk-Kastovsky Kryk-Kastovsky, Barbara Barbara Kryk-Kastovsky University of Vienna 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/896302957 01 eng 11 286 03 03 viii 03 00 278 03 01 23 340/.14 03 2018 K213 04 Law--Language. 04 Pragmatics 04 Speech acts (Linguistics) 10 LAN009030 12 CFG 24 JB code LIN.DISC Discourse studies 24 JB code LIN.FOR Forensic & legal linguistics 24 JB code LIN.PRAG Pragmatics 01 06 02 00 The volume Legal Pragmatics is a contribution to the interface between language and law. It looks at how the principles of language use can be beneficial to clarifying legal issues, its twelve chapters (together with the Introduction) offering a wide spectrum of the latest approaches to the area of legal pragmatics. 03 00 The volume Legal Pragmatics is a contribution to the interface between language and law. It looks at how the principles of language use can be beneficial to clarifying legal issues, its twelve chapters (together with the Introduction) offering a wide spectrum of the latest approaches to the area of legal pragmatics. The four chapters in the first section are devoted to historical pragmatics and take a diachronic look at old courtroom records. Written legal language is also the focus of the four chapters in the next section, dealing with the pragmatics of modern legal writing. The chapters in the third section, devoted to modern legal language, touch upon both the discourse in the courtroom and in police investigation. Finally, the two chapters in the last section on legal discourse and multilingualism address a topic very relevant to the modern era of globalisation -- the position of legal discourse in multilingual contexts. 01 00 03 01 01 D503 https://benjamins.com/covers/475/pbns.288.png 01 01 D502 https://benjamins.com/covers/475_jpg/9789027200716.jpg 01 01 D504 https://benjamins.com/covers/475_tif/9789027200716.tif 01 01 D503 https://benjamins.com/covers/1200_front/pbns.288.hb.png 01 01 D503 https://benjamins.com/covers/125/pbns.288.png 02 00 03 01 01 D503 https://benjamins.com/covers/1200_back/pbns.288.hb.png 03 00 03 01 01 D503 https://benjamins.com/covers/3d_web/pbns.288.hb.png 01 01 JB code pbns.288.int 06 10.1075/pbns.288.int 1 18 18 Chapter 1 01 04 Introduction Introduction 1 A01 01 JB code 824324874 Dennis Kurzon Kurzon, Dennis Dennis Kurzon University of Haifa 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/824324874 2 A01 01 JB code 20324875 Barbara Kryk-Kastovsky Kryk-Kastovsky, Barbara Barbara Kryk-Kastovsky University of Vienna 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/20324875 01 eng 01 01 JB code pbns.288.p1 06 10.1075/pbns.288.p1 22 97 76 Section header 2 01 04 Part 1. Historical pragmatics Part 1. Historical pragmatics 01 eng 01 01 JB code pbns.288.01dot 06 10.1075/pbns.288.01dot 21 40 20 Chapter 3 01 04 Chapter 1. Pleading for life Chapter 1. Pleading for life 01 04 Narrative patterns within legal petitions (Salem, 1692) Narrative patterns within legal petitions (Salem, 1692) 1 A01 01 JB code 126324876 Kathleen L. Doty Doty, Kathleen L. Kathleen L. Doty Humboldt State University (Arcata, California, USA) 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/126324876 01 eng 30 00

While the past decade has seen much scholarship on the legal language of the Salem witchcraft trials in 1692, few studies have been completed on the narrative features of petitions. This study focuses not solely on the formulaic or structural aspects of petitions but introduces and explores various social narratives within them. These social narratives emphasize the petitioner’s family life, religious beliefs and activities, and status in the community. The data consist of 21 petitions presented in 1692 during the height of the crisis (March to December), including both petitions written by individuals accused of witchcraft and those written by other individuals. The three main components – religious, familial, community – of social narratives are analyzed. The study concludes that the intersection between formulaic petitionary language and social narratives that evoke both family and religion dominate in the petitions of 1692. Petitions are used to reframe the accused as participants in a larger social narrative rather than as witches or wizards.

01 01 JB code pbns.288.02joh 06 10.1075/pbns.288.02joh 41 64 24 Chapter 4 01 04 Chapter 2. "How came you not to cry out?" Chapter 2. “How came you not to cry out?” 01 04 Pragmatic effects of negative questioning in child rape trials in the Old Bailey Proceedings 1730–1798 Pragmatic effects of negative questioning in child rape trials in the Old Bailey Proceedings 1730–1798 1 A01 01 JB code 831324877 Alison J. Johnson Johnson, Alison J. Alison J. Johnson University of Leeds 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/831324877 01 eng 30 00

This study explores the representation of child rape victims through an examination of the pragmatic effects of negative questioning in eighteenth century trial records in the Old Bailey Proceedings (Hitchcock et al., 2012). We see how victim identities are linguistically constructed through methods of biased, stereotypical, and negative questioning of the rape allegation. Using a combined corpus-based, sociopragmatic, discourse-analytical approach, a corpus of 36 child rape trials has been collected from the larger online database, to explore how the choice of questioning constructs the defendant and the crime in benign ways and the victim in damaging ways. Analysis reveals how ideologies about rape were reproduced in the historical courtroom. Drawing on Reisigl and Wodak’s (2009) “discourse-historical approach” we are able to see how contextual factors, such as rape myths of the time (Simpson 1986), work in conjunction with negative questions to construct problematic victim identities. The legal-pragmatic effects of these questions and their underlying ideologies, which are both reflected and constituted in the social attitudes of the time, are amplified by the legal institution, contributing to a high proportion of not guilty verdicts and indictments to lesser charges. This research reflects on recent calls in the contemporary context for better victim treatment in general and more witness sensitivity in rape trials in particular.

01 01 JB code pbns.288.03kry 06 10.1075/pbns.288.03kry 65 80 16 Chapter 5 01 04 Chapter 3. Implicatures in Early Modern English courtroom records Chapter 3. Implicatures in Early Modern English courtroom records 1 A01 01 JB code 335324878 Barbara Kryk-Kastovsky Kryk-Kastovsky, Barbara Barbara Kryk-Kastovsky University of Vienna 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/335324878 01 eng 30 00

This paper studies the role of conversational implicatures in the 17th century courtroom discourse. My hypothesis is that the use of the literal vs. non-literal language runs along the distinction between the powerless interrogated (the defendant, the witnesses) and the powerful interrogators (the judge, the counsel). While the interrogated had to resort to literal language in order to observe one of the rules of the Miranda warning (“Anything you say can be used against you”), the interrogators often employed different kinds of non-literal language for rhetorical purposes. Thus, the implicatures derivable from their discourse were instances of irony and even figures of speech, like metonymy or metaphor, which is illustrated by excerpts from three Early Modern English courtroom records. The trials of two representatives of the English nobility, The Trial of Titus Oates and The Trial of Lady Alice Lisle (both dated 1685) are contrasted with a unique case of the trial of a monarch, The Trial of King Charles (1649). The analysis reveals that while my hypothesis is corroborated by the data from the former trials, in the trial of a monarch some additional socio-historical variables have to be considered.

01 01 JB code pbns.288.04kur 06 10.1075/pbns.288.04kur 81 98 18 Chapter 6 01 04 Chapter 4. Literal interpretation and political expediency Chapter 4. Literal interpretation and political expediency 01 04 The case of Thomas More The case of Thomas More 1 A01 01 JB code 108324879 Dennis Kurzon Kurzon, Dennis Dennis Kurzon University of Haifa 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/108324879 01 eng 30 00

In July 1535, the trial of Sir Thomas More took place, in which the ex-Lord Chancellor was accused, and found guilty, of high treason for not expressing support for two statutes passed in 1534, which formed the basis of Henry VIII’s constitutional and religious changes: the Act of Succession and the Act of Supremacy. One of the stipulations was the requirement for people to take an oath in support of these changes. More refused to take the oath, arguing that according to the literal interpretation of the statutes he could be found guilty of misprision [concealment] of treason only, and not of treason itself.

However, it will be argued, More misunderstood – or refused to understand – the ultimate purpose of the statutes, which may stem from his being a lawyer: he gave the statute a literal interpretation and ignored extralinguistic information, since such information does not play a role in interpretation, unless a literal interpretation would not make sense in the context (a possible precursor of Heydon’s Case of 1584).

01 01 JB code pbns.288.p2 06 10.1075/pbns.288.p2 102 129 28 Section header 7 01 04 Part 2. Pragmatics of legal writing and documents Part 2. Pragmatics of legal writing and documents 01 eng 01 01 JB code pbns.288.05azu 06 10.1075/pbns.288.05azu 101 116 16 Chapter 8 01 04 Chapter 5. Making legal language clear to legal laypersons Chapter 5. Making legal language clear to legal laypersons 1 A01 01 JB code 144324880 Sol Azuelos-Atias Azuelos-Atias, Sol Sol Azuelos-Atias University of Haifa 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/144324880 01 eng 30 00

It is widely accepted that the legal sub-language – the language of the written law, court discussions, and legal documents – needs rephrasing in order to make it understandable to legal laypersons. Adler (2012) holds that this is possible: legal texts can be rephrased in plain language (rather than in “legalese”). The features that need rephrasing in order to make the legal language understandable to legal laypersons concern both the rich technical vocabulary of the legal sub-language and its syntactic complexity. There is, moreover, a third feature that makes the legal sub-language impenetrable for laypersons – implicit intertextual and interdiscursive links. It is the combination of these three features – the rich technical vocabulary, the syntactic complexity, and implicit intertextuality (intertextual links presented without lucid reference to their explanations) – that makes the legal sub-language impenetrable.

The legal sub-language is, naturally, the language used by legal experts in order to communicate with one another. Obviously, legal experts are supposed to know the relevant legal background knowledge of legal texts they work with; therefore, like other human communicators, authors of legal texts imply legal background knowledge, including the background knowledge relevant to their messages, rather than present it explicitly. The point of this analysis is that it is this implied professional knowledge which makes it hard for legal laypersons to understand legal texts.

01 01 JB code pbns.288.06vis 06 10.1075/pbns.288.06vis 117 130 14 Chapter 9 01 04 Chapter 6. Interpreting or in legal texts Chapter 6. Interpreting or in legal texts 1 A01 01 JB code 899324881 Jacqueline Visconti Visconti, Jacqueline Jacqueline Visconti Universities of Genoa and Birmingham 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/899324881 01 eng 30 00

Reconstructing the meaning of a text is a complex operation, involving linguistic, situational, inter-textual, cognitive, cultural, and ideological parameters. Due to a well-known polarization in contemporary linguistic theory, the interpretation process spans between an abstract “linguistic” meaning and a concrete “communicative” meaning. The former is the result of combining the meanings of the lexical units following the rules of syntax and punctuation, while the latter results from inferential processes, where linguistic meaning is taken as a point of departure and enriched with further information. The distinction between linguistic and communicative meaning maps onto the boundary between semantics and pragmatics, the conventional meaning of linguistic units vs. the meaning inferred through the interaction of linguistic meaning with context (Hansen 2008: 12ff.; Visconti 2014: 247ff.).

This chapter focuses on court decisions, a type of text in decisions, the interplay between semantics and pragmatics is particularly striking. It will investigate the way in which the interpreter, i.e. the judge, takes the linguistic meaning as an input (a set of instructions) and enriches it with further information by means of prepositions or connectives, which are often neglected in the legal literature, despite playing a crucial role in steering the interpretation.

Judges often engage in various types of linguistic analysis. The United States Supreme Court, for example, has exhibited both surprising linguistic acumen and, on the other hand, woeful disregard for how language operates in real life situations. Of course, there is not always a single correct linguistic analysis of legislative texts or conspiratorial conversations. Additionally, factors other than language are often relevant in determining the meaning of legal language; these factors are particularly relevant when the text is incomplete or ambiguous. But when interpreting a text, be it statutory or conversational, a careful linguistic analysis should always be the point of departure.

(Peter M. Tiersma, “The Judge as Linguist”, Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review, Vol. 27: 269, 1993, p. 283)
01 01 JB code pbns.288.p3 06 10.1075/pbns.288.p3 134 227 94 Section header 10 01 04 Part 3. Discourse in the courtroom and in police investigation Part 3. Discourse in the courtroom and in police investigation 01 eng 01 01 JB code pbns.288.07ain 06 10.1075/pbns.288.07ain 133 156 24 Chapter 11 01 04 Chapter 7. The nature of power and control in the interrogative patterns of selected Nigerian courtroom discourse Chapter 7. The nature of power and control in the interrogative patterns of selected Nigerian courtroom discourse 1 A01 01 JB code 3324882 Oluwasola A. Aina Aina, Oluwasola A. Oluwasola A. Aina Crawford University 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/3324882 2 A01 01 JB code 259324883 Anthony Elisha Anowu Anowu, Anthony Elisha Anthony Elisha Anowu University of Lagos, Nigeria 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/259324883 3 A01 01 JB code 10324884 Tunde Olusola Opeibi Opeibi, Tunde Olusola Tunde Olusola Opeibi University of Lagos, Nigeria 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/10324884 01 eng 30 00

This study examines power relations in two different but interrelated courtroom trials within the Nigerian socio-judicial space. One reports barrister-questioning strategies in the course of legal proceedings concerning a land dispute, and the other focuses on two election petition tribunal trials involving various barrister-witness dialogues. This article highlights the way language is used as a symbol of power in the two courtroom dialogues. Moreover, it considers questioning procedures in conjunction with the forms of witnesses’ answers and how these reproduce the nature of power and control in this institutional setting. Drawing on pragmatics and insights from Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA), we show that courtroom conventions as well as social circumstances impose some constraints on what is said and how it is said. Some insights might, thus, be gained as to the extent in which social and other extra-judicial circumstances may impact the strategy that witnesses adopt to tell their stories during interrogation.

The findings support the interplay between socio-[cultural] circumstances and legal considerations in some typical courtroom trials in Nigeria. It confirms the universality of legal proceedings, especially as regards some similarity in the various interrogative patterns that counsel deploy in courtroom encounters and how these show the asymmetric nature of legal discourse and the effect on text and talk of the participants.

01 01 JB code pbns.288.08als 06 10.1075/pbns.288.08als 157 180 24 Chapter 12 01 04 Chapter 8. The language of Egyptian interrogations Chapter 8. The language of Egyptian interrogations 01 04 A study of suspects' resistance to implicatures and presuppositions in prosecution questions A study of suspects’ resistance to implicatures and presuppositions in prosecution questions 1 A01 01 JB code 287324885 Neveen Al Saeed Al Saeed, Neveen Neveen Al Saeed University of Leeds 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/287324885 01 eng 30 00

This chapter investigates an inquisitorial system that has thus far received little attention, despite the need for research on the culture of Egyptian interrogations. It focuses on suspects’ responses in interrogations, with special focus on ‘I do not know’ as a response strategy. In addition, it investigates the nature of prosecution questions that produces these responses. These signs of prosecutor power, and control and suspects’ resistance are investigated using a qualitative, discourse-pragmatic approach. The data are selected from a larger collection of Egyptian prosecution interrogations to focus on the strategies employed by professional and worker suspects. Data include interrogations with ex-president Hosni Mubarak and his two sons, Gamal, and Alaa, which took place in 2011 after the 25th January revolution as well as ordinary workers, traders and company managers. Previous research (e.g. Harris 1991), though in adversarial settings, has focused on contest, avoidance, refusal, and emphasis of status as strategies for resistance. ‘I do not know’ responses were found to have different structures: I do not know only, I do not know with explanation and emphatic responses. Each of these subcategories plays a different pragmatic role in the interrogations.

01 01 JB code pbns.288.09arc 06 10.1075/pbns.288.09arc 181 202 22 Chapter 13 01 04 Chapter 9. Achieving influence through negotiation Chapter 9. Achieving influence through negotiation 01 04 An argument for developing pragmatic awareness An argument for developing pragmatic awareness 1 A01 01 JB code 50324886 Dawn Archer Archer, Dawn Dawn Archer Manchester Metropolitan University 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/50324886 2 A01 01 JB code 201324887 Rebecca Smithson Smithson, Rebecca Rebecca Smithson Manchester Metropolitan University 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/201324887 3 A01 01 JB code 471324888 Ian Kennedy Kennedy, Ian Ian Kennedy Sancus Solutions Ltd 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/471324888 01 eng 30 00

This chapter focuses on a now-infamous case involving 20-year old Grant Sattaur and a Californian Police Negotiator. We focus, in particular, on the last four minutes of their two-hour conversation in 2007, prior to Sattaur taking his own life. We demonstrate that, by this point in their discussion, the Negotiator was not making effective use of recognised crisis negotiation procedures as set out within models such as the behavioural staircase (Vecchi et al. 2005) and SAFE (Hammer 2007). We then go on to demonstrate that, had the negotiator had an awareness of some of the pragmatic principles of communication, he might have been more able to (re)instate components of the negotiation staircase and/or SAFE – even at this late stage in the conversation. This work reflects a larger project, via which the authors explore the linguistic “how to” of influence (Archer and Smithson 2016) with UK police negotiators, in ways that complement their existing knowledge of the psychology of influence (e.g., Cialdini 2008). Police negotiators are particularly encouraged to reject any notion of mythical ‘verbal magic bullets’ (Burleson and Goldsmith 1998: 259), which work regardless of context and/or an interlocutor’s resistance, because of the complexity of crisis negotiation, communicatively speaking.

01 01 JB code pbns.288.10nak 06 10.1075/pbns.288.10nak 203 228 26 Chapter 14 01 04 Chapter 10. "I really don't know because I'm stupid" Chapter 10. “I really don’t know because I’m stupid” 01 04 Unpacking suggestibility in investigative interviews Unpacking suggestibility in investigative interviews 1 A01 01 JB code 299324889 Ikuko Nakane Nakane, Ikuko Ikuko Nakane University of Melbourne 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/299324889 01 eng 30 00

This chapter examines how an interviewee with borderline intellectual functioning reversed his denial and gave a false confession in investigative interviews conducted by a prosecutor in a murder case in Japan. While the interviewing prosecutor’s varying approaches to questioning are likely to have contributed to the interviewee’s changing statements, the analysis also suggests that the interviewer either ignored or was unaware of the subtle cues of problematic communication, especially the ways in which the interviewee used the phrases wakaranai (I don’t know) and gomennasai (I am sorry), as well as his long silences. It is argued that such miscommunication often arose because of the interlocutors’ mismatch of knowledge schemata. The analysis demonstrates that tension and lack of interactional alignment are likely to have triggered shifts in interactional frames, which gradually led the suspect with a high level of susceptibility to pressure from law enforcement officers to making a false confession. The study suggests that discourse-pragmatic approaches to investigative interviews of vulnerable interviewees can contribute to a better understanding of miscommunication and false confessions, and improvement in interviewing practice. It also brings an insight into the role of the power dynamics operating in the specific context of criminal investigation in Japan.

01 01 JB code pbns.288.p4 06 10.1075/pbns.288.p4 232 276 45 Section header 15 01 04 Part 4. Legal discourse and multilingualism Part 4. Legal discourse and multilingualism 01 eng 01 01 JB code pbns.288.11sal 06 10.1075/pbns.288.11sal 231 256 26 Chapter 16 01 04 Chapter 11. On the balance between invariance and context-dependence Chapter 11. On the balance between invariance and context-dependence 01 04 Legal concepts and their environments Legal concepts and their environments 1 A01 01 JB code 370324890 Tarja Salmi-Tolonen Salmi-Tolonen, Tarja Tarja Salmi-Tolonen University of Turku 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/370324890 01 eng 30 00

The central question asked in this chapter is how to reconcile the well-known conundrum of legal language being at the same time decontextualized yet influenced by context. This paradox is addressed here by reviewing the meaning of currently topical legal notions in environments where there are two or more valid jurisdictions – the national and the supranational or transnational – simultaneously present. Textualism and contextualism need not be conflicting paradigms in finding a solution between competing meanings. Rather, a balance could be struck through linguistic explanation. The paradox of competing interpretations is discussed here from the point of view of both law-givers and law-takers.

01 01 JB code pbns.288.12yan 06 10.1075/pbns.288.12yan 257 276 20 Chapter 17 01 04 Chapter 12. Contextuality of interpretation in non-monolingual jurisdictions Chapter 12. Contextuality of interpretation in non-monolingual jurisdictions 01 04 The Canadian experience The Canadian experience 1 A01 01 JB code 96324891 Diana Yankova Yankova, Diana Diana Yankova New Bulgarian University 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/96324891 01 eng 30 00

Within the context of legal systems Canada manifests unique features originating in the co-existence of the two different legal systems of common law and civil law, worded respectively in English and French. Some converging and diverging elements of this idiosyncratic bijural and bilingual legal regime are examined and terminological issues arising in the process of harmonizing federal legislation with the Code Civil du Québec are discussed. The focus is on the procedure adopted in cases of conceptual and terminological non-correspondence, the drafting techniques employed, and the justification for choice in each particular instance contingent on the context, with the ultimate aim of providing optimal solutions regarding current pressing difficulties in the harmonization of legal terms in the supranational and multilingual system of the European Union.

01 01 JB code pbns.288.ind 06 10.1075/pbns.288.ind 277 278 2 Miscellaneous 18 01 04 Legal pragmatics - subject index proposal Legal pragmatics - subject index proposal 01 eng
01 JB code JBENJAMINS John Benjamins Publishing Company 01 01 JB code JB John Benjamins Publishing Company 01 https://benjamins.com 02 https://benjamins.com/catalog/pbns.288 Amsterdam NL 00 John Benjamins Publishing Company Marketing Department / Karin Plijnaar, Pieter Lamers onix@benjamins.nl 04 01 00 20180426 C 2018 John Benjamins D 2018 John Benjamins 02 WORLD WORLD US CA MX 09 01 JB 1 John Benjamins Publishing Company +31 20 6304747 +31 20 6739773 bookorder@benjamins.nl 01 https://benjamins.com 21 63 20 01 00 Unqualified price 02 JB 1 02 95.00 EUR 02 00 Unqualified price 02 80.00 01 Z 0 GBP GB US CA MX 01 01 JB 2 John Benjamins Publishing Company +1 800 562-5666 +1 703 661-1501 benjamins@presswarehouse.com 01 https://benjamins.com 21 63 20 01 00 Unqualified price 02 JB 1 02 143.00 USD
896018327 03 01 01 JB code JB John Benjamins Publishing Company 01 JB code P&bns 288 Eb 15 9789027264077 06 10.1075/pbns.288 00 EA E107 10 01 JB code P&bns 02 0922-842X 02 288.00 01 02 Pragmatics & Beyond New Series Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 11 01 JB code jbe-all 01 02 Full EBA collection (ca. 4,200 titles) 11 01 JB code jbe-eba-2023 01 02 Compact EBA Collection 2023 (ca. 700 titles, starting 2018) 11 01 JB code jbe-2018 01 02 2018 collection (152 titles) 05 02 2018 collection 01 01 Legal Pragmatics Legal Pragmatics 1 B01 01 JB code 38302956 Dennis Kurzon Kurzon, Dennis Dennis Kurzon University of Haifa 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/38302956 2 B01 01 JB code 896302957 Barbara Kryk-Kastovsky Kryk-Kastovsky, Barbara Barbara Kryk-Kastovsky University of Vienna 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/896302957 01 eng 11 286 03 03 viii 03 00 278 03 01 23 340/.14 03 2018 K213 04 Law--Language. 04 Pragmatics 04 Speech acts (Linguistics) 10 LAN009030 12 CFG 24 JB code LIN.DISC Discourse studies 24 JB code LIN.FOR Forensic & legal linguistics 24 JB code LIN.PRAG Pragmatics 01 06 02 00 The volume Legal Pragmatics is a contribution to the interface between language and law. It looks at how the principles of language use can be beneficial to clarifying legal issues, its twelve chapters (together with the Introduction) offering a wide spectrum of the latest approaches to the area of legal pragmatics. 03 00 The volume Legal Pragmatics is a contribution to the interface between language and law. It looks at how the principles of language use can be beneficial to clarifying legal issues, its twelve chapters (together with the Introduction) offering a wide spectrum of the latest approaches to the area of legal pragmatics. The four chapters in the first section are devoted to historical pragmatics and take a diachronic look at old courtroom records. Written legal language is also the focus of the four chapters in the next section, dealing with the pragmatics of modern legal writing. The chapters in the third section, devoted to modern legal language, touch upon both the discourse in the courtroom and in police investigation. Finally, the two chapters in the last section on legal discourse and multilingualism address a topic very relevant to the modern era of globalisation -- the position of legal discourse in multilingual contexts. 01 00 03 01 01 D503 https://benjamins.com/covers/475/pbns.288.png 01 01 D502 https://benjamins.com/covers/475_jpg/9789027200716.jpg 01 01 D504 https://benjamins.com/covers/475_tif/9789027200716.tif 01 01 D503 https://benjamins.com/covers/1200_front/pbns.288.hb.png 01 01 D503 https://benjamins.com/covers/125/pbns.288.png 02 00 03 01 01 D503 https://benjamins.com/covers/1200_back/pbns.288.hb.png 03 00 03 01 01 D503 https://benjamins.com/covers/3d_web/pbns.288.hb.png 01 01 JB code pbns.288.int 06 10.1075/pbns.288.int 1 18 18 Chapter 1 01 04 Introduction Introduction 1 A01 01 JB code 824324874 Dennis Kurzon Kurzon, Dennis Dennis Kurzon University of Haifa 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/824324874 2 A01 01 JB code 20324875 Barbara Kryk-Kastovsky Kryk-Kastovsky, Barbara Barbara Kryk-Kastovsky University of Vienna 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/20324875 01 eng 01 01 JB code pbns.288.p1 06 10.1075/pbns.288.p1 22 97 76 Section header 2 01 04 Part 1. Historical pragmatics Part 1. Historical pragmatics 01 eng 01 01 JB code pbns.288.01dot 06 10.1075/pbns.288.01dot 21 40 20 Chapter 3 01 04 Chapter 1. Pleading for life Chapter 1. Pleading for life 01 04 Narrative patterns within legal petitions (Salem, 1692) Narrative patterns within legal petitions (Salem, 1692) 1 A01 01 JB code 126324876 Kathleen L. Doty Doty, Kathleen L. Kathleen L. Doty Humboldt State University (Arcata, California, USA) 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/126324876 01 eng 30 00

While the past decade has seen much scholarship on the legal language of the Salem witchcraft trials in 1692, few studies have been completed on the narrative features of petitions. This study focuses not solely on the formulaic or structural aspects of petitions but introduces and explores various social narratives within them. These social narratives emphasize the petitioner’s family life, religious beliefs and activities, and status in the community. The data consist of 21 petitions presented in 1692 during the height of the crisis (March to December), including both petitions written by individuals accused of witchcraft and those written by other individuals. The three main components – religious, familial, community – of social narratives are analyzed. The study concludes that the intersection between formulaic petitionary language and social narratives that evoke both family and religion dominate in the petitions of 1692. Petitions are used to reframe the accused as participants in a larger social narrative rather than as witches or wizards.

01 01 JB code pbns.288.02joh 06 10.1075/pbns.288.02joh 41 64 24 Chapter 4 01 04 Chapter 2. "How came you not to cry out?" Chapter 2. “How came you not to cry out?” 01 04 Pragmatic effects of negative questioning in child rape trials in the Old Bailey Proceedings 1730–1798 Pragmatic effects of negative questioning in child rape trials in the Old Bailey Proceedings 1730–1798 1 A01 01 JB code 831324877 Alison J. Johnson Johnson, Alison J. Alison J. Johnson University of Leeds 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/831324877 01 eng 30 00

This study explores the representation of child rape victims through an examination of the pragmatic effects of negative questioning in eighteenth century trial records in the Old Bailey Proceedings (Hitchcock et al., 2012). We see how victim identities are linguistically constructed through methods of biased, stereotypical, and negative questioning of the rape allegation. Using a combined corpus-based, sociopragmatic, discourse-analytical approach, a corpus of 36 child rape trials has been collected from the larger online database, to explore how the choice of questioning constructs the defendant and the crime in benign ways and the victim in damaging ways. Analysis reveals how ideologies about rape were reproduced in the historical courtroom. Drawing on Reisigl and Wodak’s (2009) “discourse-historical approach” we are able to see how contextual factors, such as rape myths of the time (Simpson 1986), work in conjunction with negative questions to construct problematic victim identities. The legal-pragmatic effects of these questions and their underlying ideologies, which are both reflected and constituted in the social attitudes of the time, are amplified by the legal institution, contributing to a high proportion of not guilty verdicts and indictments to lesser charges. This research reflects on recent calls in the contemporary context for better victim treatment in general and more witness sensitivity in rape trials in particular.

01 01 JB code pbns.288.03kry 06 10.1075/pbns.288.03kry 65 80 16 Chapter 5 01 04 Chapter 3. Implicatures in Early Modern English courtroom records Chapter 3. Implicatures in Early Modern English courtroom records 1 A01 01 JB code 335324878 Barbara Kryk-Kastovsky Kryk-Kastovsky, Barbara Barbara Kryk-Kastovsky University of Vienna 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/335324878 01 eng 30 00

This paper studies the role of conversational implicatures in the 17th century courtroom discourse. My hypothesis is that the use of the literal vs. non-literal language runs along the distinction between the powerless interrogated (the defendant, the witnesses) and the powerful interrogators (the judge, the counsel). While the interrogated had to resort to literal language in order to observe one of the rules of the Miranda warning (“Anything you say can be used against you”), the interrogators often employed different kinds of non-literal language for rhetorical purposes. Thus, the implicatures derivable from their discourse were instances of irony and even figures of speech, like metonymy or metaphor, which is illustrated by excerpts from three Early Modern English courtroom records. The trials of two representatives of the English nobility, The Trial of Titus Oates and The Trial of Lady Alice Lisle (both dated 1685) are contrasted with a unique case of the trial of a monarch, The Trial of King Charles (1649). The analysis reveals that while my hypothesis is corroborated by the data from the former trials, in the trial of a monarch some additional socio-historical variables have to be considered.

01 01 JB code pbns.288.04kur 06 10.1075/pbns.288.04kur 81 98 18 Chapter 6 01 04 Chapter 4. Literal interpretation and political expediency Chapter 4. Literal interpretation and political expediency 01 04 The case of Thomas More The case of Thomas More 1 A01 01 JB code 108324879 Dennis Kurzon Kurzon, Dennis Dennis Kurzon University of Haifa 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/108324879 01 eng 30 00

In July 1535, the trial of Sir Thomas More took place, in which the ex-Lord Chancellor was accused, and found guilty, of high treason for not expressing support for two statutes passed in 1534, which formed the basis of Henry VIII’s constitutional and religious changes: the Act of Succession and the Act of Supremacy. One of the stipulations was the requirement for people to take an oath in support of these changes. More refused to take the oath, arguing that according to the literal interpretation of the statutes he could be found guilty of misprision [concealment] of treason only, and not of treason itself.

However, it will be argued, More misunderstood – or refused to understand – the ultimate purpose of the statutes, which may stem from his being a lawyer: he gave the statute a literal interpretation and ignored extralinguistic information, since such information does not play a role in interpretation, unless a literal interpretation would not make sense in the context (a possible precursor of Heydon’s Case of 1584).

01 01 JB code pbns.288.p2 06 10.1075/pbns.288.p2 102 129 28 Section header 7 01 04 Part 2. Pragmatics of legal writing and documents Part 2. Pragmatics of legal writing and documents 01 eng 01 01 JB code pbns.288.05azu 06 10.1075/pbns.288.05azu 101 116 16 Chapter 8 01 04 Chapter 5. Making legal language clear to legal laypersons Chapter 5. Making legal language clear to legal laypersons 1 A01 01 JB code 144324880 Sol Azuelos-Atias Azuelos-Atias, Sol Sol Azuelos-Atias University of Haifa 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/144324880 01 eng 30 00

It is widely accepted that the legal sub-language – the language of the written law, court discussions, and legal documents – needs rephrasing in order to make it understandable to legal laypersons. Adler (2012) holds that this is possible: legal texts can be rephrased in plain language (rather than in “legalese”). The features that need rephrasing in order to make the legal language understandable to legal laypersons concern both the rich technical vocabulary of the legal sub-language and its syntactic complexity. There is, moreover, a third feature that makes the legal sub-language impenetrable for laypersons – implicit intertextual and interdiscursive links. It is the combination of these three features – the rich technical vocabulary, the syntactic complexity, and implicit intertextuality (intertextual links presented without lucid reference to their explanations) – that makes the legal sub-language impenetrable.

The legal sub-language is, naturally, the language used by legal experts in order to communicate with one another. Obviously, legal experts are supposed to know the relevant legal background knowledge of legal texts they work with; therefore, like other human communicators, authors of legal texts imply legal background knowledge, including the background knowledge relevant to their messages, rather than present it explicitly. The point of this analysis is that it is this implied professional knowledge which makes it hard for legal laypersons to understand legal texts.

01 01 JB code pbns.288.06vis 06 10.1075/pbns.288.06vis 117 130 14 Chapter 9 01 04 Chapter 6. Interpreting or in legal texts Chapter 6. Interpreting or in legal texts 1 A01 01 JB code 899324881 Jacqueline Visconti Visconti, Jacqueline Jacqueline Visconti Universities of Genoa and Birmingham 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/899324881 01 eng 30 00

Reconstructing the meaning of a text is a complex operation, involving linguistic, situational, inter-textual, cognitive, cultural, and ideological parameters. Due to a well-known polarization in contemporary linguistic theory, the interpretation process spans between an abstract “linguistic” meaning and a concrete “communicative” meaning. The former is the result of combining the meanings of the lexical units following the rules of syntax and punctuation, while the latter results from inferential processes, where linguistic meaning is taken as a point of departure and enriched with further information. The distinction between linguistic and communicative meaning maps onto the boundary between semantics and pragmatics, the conventional meaning of linguistic units vs. the meaning inferred through the interaction of linguistic meaning with context (Hansen 2008: 12ff.; Visconti 2014: 247ff.).

This chapter focuses on court decisions, a type of text in decisions, the interplay between semantics and pragmatics is particularly striking. It will investigate the way in which the interpreter, i.e. the judge, takes the linguistic meaning as an input (a set of instructions) and enriches it with further information by means of prepositions or connectives, which are often neglected in the legal literature, despite playing a crucial role in steering the interpretation.

Judges often engage in various types of linguistic analysis. The United States Supreme Court, for example, has exhibited both surprising linguistic acumen and, on the other hand, woeful disregard for how language operates in real life situations. Of course, there is not always a single correct linguistic analysis of legislative texts or conspiratorial conversations. Additionally, factors other than language are often relevant in determining the meaning of legal language; these factors are particularly relevant when the text is incomplete or ambiguous. But when interpreting a text, be it statutory or conversational, a careful linguistic analysis should always be the point of departure.

(Peter M. Tiersma, “The Judge as Linguist”, Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review, Vol. 27: 269, 1993, p. 283)
01 01 JB code pbns.288.p3 06 10.1075/pbns.288.p3 134 227 94 Section header 10 01 04 Part 3. Discourse in the courtroom and in police investigation Part 3. Discourse in the courtroom and in police investigation 01 eng 01 01 JB code pbns.288.07ain 06 10.1075/pbns.288.07ain 133 156 24 Chapter 11 01 04 Chapter 7. The nature of power and control in the interrogative patterns of selected Nigerian courtroom discourse Chapter 7. The nature of power and control in the interrogative patterns of selected Nigerian courtroom discourse 1 A01 01 JB code 3324882 Oluwasola A. Aina Aina, Oluwasola A. Oluwasola A. Aina Crawford University 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/3324882 2 A01 01 JB code 259324883 Anthony Elisha Anowu Anowu, Anthony Elisha Anthony Elisha Anowu University of Lagos, Nigeria 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/259324883 3 A01 01 JB code 10324884 Tunde Olusola Opeibi Opeibi, Tunde Olusola Tunde Olusola Opeibi University of Lagos, Nigeria 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/10324884 01 eng 30 00

This study examines power relations in two different but interrelated courtroom trials within the Nigerian socio-judicial space. One reports barrister-questioning strategies in the course of legal proceedings concerning a land dispute, and the other focuses on two election petition tribunal trials involving various barrister-witness dialogues. This article highlights the way language is used as a symbol of power in the two courtroom dialogues. Moreover, it considers questioning procedures in conjunction with the forms of witnesses’ answers and how these reproduce the nature of power and control in this institutional setting. Drawing on pragmatics and insights from Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA), we show that courtroom conventions as well as social circumstances impose some constraints on what is said and how it is said. Some insights might, thus, be gained as to the extent in which social and other extra-judicial circumstances may impact the strategy that witnesses adopt to tell their stories during interrogation.

The findings support the interplay between socio-[cultural] circumstances and legal considerations in some typical courtroom trials in Nigeria. It confirms the universality of legal proceedings, especially as regards some similarity in the various interrogative patterns that counsel deploy in courtroom encounters and how these show the asymmetric nature of legal discourse and the effect on text and talk of the participants.

01 01 JB code pbns.288.08als 06 10.1075/pbns.288.08als 157 180 24 Chapter 12 01 04 Chapter 8. The language of Egyptian interrogations Chapter 8. The language of Egyptian interrogations 01 04 A study of suspects' resistance to implicatures and presuppositions in prosecution questions A study of suspects’ resistance to implicatures and presuppositions in prosecution questions 1 A01 01 JB code 287324885 Neveen Al Saeed Al Saeed, Neveen Neveen Al Saeed University of Leeds 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/287324885 01 eng 30 00

This chapter investigates an inquisitorial system that has thus far received little attention, despite the need for research on the culture of Egyptian interrogations. It focuses on suspects’ responses in interrogations, with special focus on ‘I do not know’ as a response strategy. In addition, it investigates the nature of prosecution questions that produces these responses. These signs of prosecutor power, and control and suspects’ resistance are investigated using a qualitative, discourse-pragmatic approach. The data are selected from a larger collection of Egyptian prosecution interrogations to focus on the strategies employed by professional and worker suspects. Data include interrogations with ex-president Hosni Mubarak and his two sons, Gamal, and Alaa, which took place in 2011 after the 25th January revolution as well as ordinary workers, traders and company managers. Previous research (e.g. Harris 1991), though in adversarial settings, has focused on contest, avoidance, refusal, and emphasis of status as strategies for resistance. ‘I do not know’ responses were found to have different structures: I do not know only, I do not know with explanation and emphatic responses. Each of these subcategories plays a different pragmatic role in the interrogations.

01 01 JB code pbns.288.09arc 06 10.1075/pbns.288.09arc 181 202 22 Chapter 13 01 04 Chapter 9. Achieving influence through negotiation Chapter 9. Achieving influence through negotiation 01 04 An argument for developing pragmatic awareness An argument for developing pragmatic awareness 1 A01 01 JB code 50324886 Dawn Archer Archer, Dawn Dawn Archer Manchester Metropolitan University 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/50324886 2 A01 01 JB code 201324887 Rebecca Smithson Smithson, Rebecca Rebecca Smithson Manchester Metropolitan University 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/201324887 3 A01 01 JB code 471324888 Ian Kennedy Kennedy, Ian Ian Kennedy Sancus Solutions Ltd 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/471324888 01 eng 30 00

This chapter focuses on a now-infamous case involving 20-year old Grant Sattaur and a Californian Police Negotiator. We focus, in particular, on the last four minutes of their two-hour conversation in 2007, prior to Sattaur taking his own life. We demonstrate that, by this point in their discussion, the Negotiator was not making effective use of recognised crisis negotiation procedures as set out within models such as the behavioural staircase (Vecchi et al. 2005) and SAFE (Hammer 2007). We then go on to demonstrate that, had the negotiator had an awareness of some of the pragmatic principles of communication, he might have been more able to (re)instate components of the negotiation staircase and/or SAFE – even at this late stage in the conversation. This work reflects a larger project, via which the authors explore the linguistic “how to” of influence (Archer and Smithson 2016) with UK police negotiators, in ways that complement their existing knowledge of the psychology of influence (e.g., Cialdini 2008). Police negotiators are particularly encouraged to reject any notion of mythical ‘verbal magic bullets’ (Burleson and Goldsmith 1998: 259), which work regardless of context and/or an interlocutor’s resistance, because of the complexity of crisis negotiation, communicatively speaking.

01 01 JB code pbns.288.10nak 06 10.1075/pbns.288.10nak 203 228 26 Chapter 14 01 04 Chapter 10. "I really don't know because I'm stupid" Chapter 10. “I really don’t know because I’m stupid” 01 04 Unpacking suggestibility in investigative interviews Unpacking suggestibility in investigative interviews 1 A01 01 JB code 299324889 Ikuko Nakane Nakane, Ikuko Ikuko Nakane University of Melbourne 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/299324889 01 eng 30 00

This chapter examines how an interviewee with borderline intellectual functioning reversed his denial and gave a false confession in investigative interviews conducted by a prosecutor in a murder case in Japan. While the interviewing prosecutor’s varying approaches to questioning are likely to have contributed to the interviewee’s changing statements, the analysis also suggests that the interviewer either ignored or was unaware of the subtle cues of problematic communication, especially the ways in which the interviewee used the phrases wakaranai (I don’t know) and gomennasai (I am sorry), as well as his long silences. It is argued that such miscommunication often arose because of the interlocutors’ mismatch of knowledge schemata. The analysis demonstrates that tension and lack of interactional alignment are likely to have triggered shifts in interactional frames, which gradually led the suspect with a high level of susceptibility to pressure from law enforcement officers to making a false confession. The study suggests that discourse-pragmatic approaches to investigative interviews of vulnerable interviewees can contribute to a better understanding of miscommunication and false confessions, and improvement in interviewing practice. It also brings an insight into the role of the power dynamics operating in the specific context of criminal investigation in Japan.

01 01 JB code pbns.288.p4 06 10.1075/pbns.288.p4 232 276 45 Section header 15 01 04 Part 4. Legal discourse and multilingualism Part 4. Legal discourse and multilingualism 01 eng 01 01 JB code pbns.288.11sal 06 10.1075/pbns.288.11sal 231 256 26 Chapter 16 01 04 Chapter 11. On the balance between invariance and context-dependence Chapter 11. On the balance between invariance and context-dependence 01 04 Legal concepts and their environments Legal concepts and their environments 1 A01 01 JB code 370324890 Tarja Salmi-Tolonen Salmi-Tolonen, Tarja Tarja Salmi-Tolonen University of Turku 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/370324890 01 eng 30 00

The central question asked in this chapter is how to reconcile the well-known conundrum of legal language being at the same time decontextualized yet influenced by context. This paradox is addressed here by reviewing the meaning of currently topical legal notions in environments where there are two or more valid jurisdictions – the national and the supranational or transnational – simultaneously present. Textualism and contextualism need not be conflicting paradigms in finding a solution between competing meanings. Rather, a balance could be struck through linguistic explanation. The paradox of competing interpretations is discussed here from the point of view of both law-givers and law-takers.

01 01 JB code pbns.288.12yan 06 10.1075/pbns.288.12yan 257 276 20 Chapter 17 01 04 Chapter 12. Contextuality of interpretation in non-monolingual jurisdictions Chapter 12. Contextuality of interpretation in non-monolingual jurisdictions 01 04 The Canadian experience The Canadian experience 1 A01 01 JB code 96324891 Diana Yankova Yankova, Diana Diana Yankova New Bulgarian University 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/96324891 01 eng 30 00

Within the context of legal systems Canada manifests unique features originating in the co-existence of the two different legal systems of common law and civil law, worded respectively in English and French. Some converging and diverging elements of this idiosyncratic bijural and bilingual legal regime are examined and terminological issues arising in the process of harmonizing federal legislation with the Code Civil du Québec are discussed. The focus is on the procedure adopted in cases of conceptual and terminological non-correspondence, the drafting techniques employed, and the justification for choice in each particular instance contingent on the context, with the ultimate aim of providing optimal solutions regarding current pressing difficulties in the harmonization of legal terms in the supranational and multilingual system of the European Union.

01 01 JB code pbns.288.ind 06 10.1075/pbns.288.ind 277 278 2 Miscellaneous 18 01 04 Legal pragmatics - subject index proposal Legal pragmatics - subject index proposal 01 eng
01 JB code JBENJAMINS John Benjamins Publishing Company 01 01 JB code JB John Benjamins Publishing Company 01 https://benjamins.com 02 https://benjamins.com/catalog/pbns.288 Amsterdam NL 00 John Benjamins Publishing Company Marketing Department / Karin Plijnaar, Pieter Lamers onix@benjamins.nl 04 01 00 20180426 C 2018 John Benjamins D 2018 John Benjamins 02 WORLD 13 15 9789027200716 WORLD 09 01 JB 3 John Benjamins e-Platform 03 https://jbe-platform.com 29 https://jbe-platform.com/content/books/9789027264077 21 01 00 Unqualified price 02 95.00 EUR 01 00 Unqualified price 02 80.00 GBP GB 01 00 Unqualified price 02 143.00 USD