Cover not available
Part of
Politeness in Professional Contexts
Edited by Dawn Archer, Karen Grainger and Piotr Jagodziński
[Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 311] 2020
► pp. 251–272

Chapter 11
Judicial questioning

How context shapes facework strategies

| University of Colorado
Keywords: communication practices, context, face(work), identity-work, judge, oral argument, politeness, questioning, small claim trials
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Past research on questioning and facework in courtrooms
  • 3.Appellate judge questioning during oral argument
  • 4.Small claims court judge questioning
  • 5.Using “context” in future research on face and politeness
    • 5.1Politeness/face concepts as sensitizing tools
    • 5.2How context shapes politeness theorizing
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 21 August 2020
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.311.11tra
References
Aldridge, Michelle, and June Luchjenbroers
2007 “Linguistic Manipulations in Legal Discourse: Framing Questions and “Smuggling” Information.” Journal of Speech, Language, and the Law 14: 85–107.Google Scholar
Archer, Dawn
2011 “Cross-examining Lawyers, Facework and the Adversarial Courtroom.” Journal of Pragmatics 43 (13): 3216–3230. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2017 “Impoliteness in Legal Settings.” In The Palgrave Handbook of Linguistic (Im)politeness, ed. by Jonathan Culpeper, Michael Haugh and Daniel Z. Kadar, 713–737. London: Palgrave. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Auer, Peter, and Aldo de Luzio
(eds) 1992 The Contextualization of Language. Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bartesaghi, M.
2009 “Conversation and Psychotherapy: How Questioning Reveals Institutional Answers.” Discourse Studies 11: 153–177. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bousfield, Derek
2008 Impoliteness in Interaction. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brown, Penelope, and Stephen C. Levinson
1978 “Universals in Language Usage: Politeness Phenomena.” In Questions and Politeness: Strategies in Social Interaction, ed. by Ester N. Goody, 56–310. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Clayman, Steven
2010 “Questions in Broadcast Journalism.” In “Why do you ask?” The Function of Questions in Institutional Discourse, ed. by Susan Ehrlich and Alice Freed, 256–278. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Craig, Robert T., and Karen Tracy
1995 “Grounded Practical Theory: The Case of Intellectual Discussion.” Communication Theory 5: 248–272. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2014 “Building Grounded Practical Theory in Applied Communication Research: Introduction to the Special Issue.” Journal of Applied Communication Research 42 (3): 229–243. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Culpeper, Jonathan, Michael Haugh, and Daniel Z. Kadar
(eds) 2017 The Palgrave Handbook of Linguistic (Im)politeness. London: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Culpeper, Jonathan, and Marina Terkourafi
2017 “Pragmatic Approaches (Im)politeness.” In The Palgrave Handbook of Linguistic (Im)politeness, ed. by Jonathan Culpeper, Michael Haugh and Daniel Z. Kadar, 11–39. London: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Drew, Paul
1992 “Contested Evidence in Courtroom Cross-examination: The Case of a Trial for Rape.” In Talk at Work, ed. by Paul Drew and John Heritage, 470–520. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Duranti, A., and C. Goodwin
(eds) 1992 Rethinking Context: Language as an Interactive Phenomenon. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Ehrlich, Susan, and Alice F. Freed
2010 “The Function of Questions in Institutional Discourse.” In “Why Do You Ask?” The Function of Questions in Institutional Discourse, ed. by S. Ehrlich and A. F. Freed, 3–19. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ford, Cecilia E.
2010 “Questioning in Meetings: Participation and Positioning.” In “Why Do You Ask?” The Function of Questions in Institutional Discourse, ed. by Susan Ehrlich and Alice Freed, 211–234. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Goffman, E.
1955 “On Facework: An Analysis of Ritual Elements in Social Interaction.” Psychiatry: Interpersonal and Biological Processes 18: 213–231. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goffman, Erving
1979 “Footing.” Semiotica 25: 1–29. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grainger, Karen
2018 ““We’re Not in a Club Now”: A Neo-Brown and Levinson Approach to Analyzing Courtroom Data.” Journal of Politeness Research 14 (1): 19–38. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grisci, Augusto, and Clotide Pontecorvo
2004 “The Organization of Questions and Answers in the Thematic Phases of Hostile Examination: Turn-by-turn Manipulation of Meaning.” Journal of Pragmatics 36: 965–995. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Harris, Sandra
2011 “The Limits of Politeness Revisited.” In Discursive Approaches to Politeness, ed. by Linguistic Research Politeness Group, 85–108. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Hepburn, Alexa, and Jonathan Potter
2010 “Interrogating Tears: Some Uses of “Tag Questions” in a Child Protection Helpline.” In “Why Do You Ask?” The Function of Questions in Institutional Discourse, ed. by Susan Ehrlich and Alice Freed, 69–86. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Heritage, John
2002 “The Limits of Questioning: Negative Interrogatives and Hostile Question Content.” Journal of Pragmatics 34 (10): 1427–1446. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2010 “Questioning in Medicine.” In “Why Do You Ask?”: The Function of Questions in Institutional Discourse, ed. by Alice Freed and Susan Ehrlich, 42–68. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Houwen, Fleur van der
2015 ““If It Doesn’t Make Sense It’s Not True” How Judge Judy Creates Coherent Stories Through “Common-Sense” Reasoning According to the Neoliberal Agenda.” Social Semiotics 25: 255–273. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hultgreen, Anna Kristina, and Deborah Cameron
2010 ““How May I Help You?”: Questions, Control, and Customer Care in Telephone Call Center Talk.” In “Why Do You Ask?” The Function of Questions in Institutional Discourse, ed. by Susan Ehrlich and Alice Freed, 322–342. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hutchby, Ian
2008 “Participants’ Orientations to Interruptions, Rudeness and other Impolite Acts in Talk-in-interaction.” Journal of Politeness Research. Language, Behaviour, Culture 4 (2): 221–241.Google Scholar
Ilie, Cornelia
2015 “Questions and Questioning.” In The International Encyclopedia of Language and Social Interaction, ed. by Karen Tracy, Cornelia Ilie and Todd Sandel, 1257–1271. Boston: Wiley-Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Johnson, Alison., & Ruth Clifford
(2011) “Polite Incivility in Defensive Attack: Strategic Politeness and Impoliteness in Cross-Examination in the David Irving vs. Penguin Books Ltd and Deborah Lipstadt Trial Journal of Politeness Research, 7(1), 43–51. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Johnson, Timothy R.
2004 Oral Arguments and Decision Making on the United States Supreme Court. Albany, NY: State University of New York.Google Scholar
Lakoff, Robin Tolmach
1989 “The Limits of Politeness: Therapeutic and Courtroom Discourse.” Multilingua 8 (2–3): 101–129. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Leeds-Hurwitz, Wendy
1997 “The Concept of Context in Social Communication Theory.” In Context and communication behavior, ed. by James L. Owen, 319–335. Reno, NV: Context Press.Google Scholar
Levinson, Stephen C.
1992 “Activity Types and Language." In Talk at work: Interaction in institutional settings ed. by Paul Drew and John. Heritage, 66–100. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lim, T., and John W. Bowers
1991 “Facework, Solidarity, Approbation and Tact.” Human Communication Research 17: 415–450. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Margutti, Piera
2010 “On Designedly Incomplete Utterances: What Counts as Learning for Teachers and Students in Primary Classroom Interaction.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 43 (4): 315–345. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mills, C. Wright
1940 “Situated Actions and Vocabularies of Motive.” American Sociological Review 5:904–913. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mills, Sara
2011 “Discursive Approaches to Politeness and Impoliteness.” In Discursive Approaches to Politeness, ed. by Linguistic Research Politeness Group, 19–56. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
O’Driscoll, Jim
2017 “Face and (Im)politeness.” In The Palgrave Handbook of Linguistic (Im)politeness, ed. by Jonathan Culpeper, Michael Haugh and Daniel Z. Kadar, 89–118. London: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Owen, James L.
(ed) 1997 Context and communication behavior. Reno, NV: Context Press.Google Scholar
Oxburgh, Gavin E., Trond Myklebust, and Tim Grant
2010 “The Question of Question Types in Police Interviews: A Review of the Literature from a Psychological and Linguistic Perspective.” International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law 17 (1): 45–66. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pascual, Esther
2006 “Questions in Legal Monologues: Fictive Interaction as Argumentative Strategy in a Murder Trial.” Text and Talk 26: 382–402.Google Scholar
Penman, Robyn
1987 “Discourse in Courts: Cooperation, Coercion, and Coherence.” Discourse Processes 10: 210–218. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1990 “Facework and Politeness: Multiple Goals in Courtroom Discourse.” Journal of Language and Social Psychology 9: 15–38. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Philips, Susan U.
1998 Ideology in the Language of Judges: How Judges Practice Law, Politics, and Courtroom Control. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Pomerantz, Anita
1988 “Offering a Candidate Answer: An Information Seeking Strategy.” Communication Monographs 55: 360–373. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rottman, David, and Tom R. Tyler
2014 “Thinking about Judges and Judicial Performance: Perspectives of the Public and Court Users.” Onati Socio-legal Series 4 (5): 1046–1070.Google Scholar
Ruhnka, John C., and Steven Weller
1978 Small Claims Courts: A National Examination. Williamsburg, VA: National Center for State Courts.Google Scholar
Scotton, Carol
1985 “What the Heck, Sir: Style shifting and Lexical Colouring as Features of Powerful Language.” In Sequences and Pattern in Communicative Behaviour, ed. by Richard L. Street and Joseph N. Cappella, 103–119. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
Segal, Jeffrey A., and Harold J. Spaeth
2002 The Supreme Court and the Attitudinal Model Revisited. New York: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shuy, Roger W.
1995 “How a Judge’s Voir Dire Can Teach a Jury What to Say.” Discourse and Society 6: 207–222. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sidnell, Jack
2010 “The Design and Positioning of Questions in Inquiry Testimony.” In “Why do You Ask?” The Function of Questions in Institutional Discourse, ed. by Susan Ehrlich and Alice Freed, 20–41. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Spencer-Oatey, Helen
2002 “Managing Rapport in Talk: Using Rapport Sensitive Incidents to Explore the Motivational Concerns Underlying the Management of $elations." Journal of Pragmatics 34 : 529–545. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tracy, Karen
1997 Colloquium: Dilemmas of Academic Discourse. Norwood, N.J.: Ablex.Google Scholar
1998 “Analyzing Context: Framing the discussion.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 31 (1): 1–28. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2008 ““Reasonable Hostility”: Situation–appropriate Face Attack.” Journal of Politeness Research: Language, Behaviour, Culture 4: 169–191. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2011 “A Facework System of Minimal Politeness: Oral argument in Appellate Court”. Journal of Politeness Research: Language, Behaviour, Culture 7 (1): 123–145. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2011 “Identity-work in Appellate Oral Argument: Ideological Identities within a Professional One”. In Constructing Identities at Work, ed. by J. Angouri and M. Marra, 179–203. Brunel, UK: Palgrave.Google Scholar
2016 Discourse, Identity, and Social Change in the Marriage Equality Debates. New York: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tracy, Karen, and Mary Caron
2017 “How the Language Style of Small Claims Judges Does Ideological Work.” Journal of Language and Social Psychology 36 (3):321–342. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tracy, Karen, and Robert T. Craig
2019 “Decision Announcements in Small Claims Court: A Recurring Judge Dilemma.” Language and Dialogue 9 (1):65–85. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tracy, Karen, and Danielle Hodge
2018 “Judge Discourse Moves that Enact and Endanger Procedural Justice.” Discourse and Society 29 (1):63–85. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2019 “Discourse Features of Disputing in Small Claims Hearings.” In Routledge Handbook of Language in Conflict, ed. by Jim O’Driscoll and Lesley Jeffries, 271–285. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tracy, Karen, and Russell M. Parks
2012 ““Tough Questioning”“ as Enactment of Ideology in Judicial Conduct: Marriage Law Appeals in Seven US Courts.” International Journal of Speech Language and the Law 19 (1): 1–25. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tracy, Karen, and Jessica S. Robles
2009 “Question, Questioning, and Institutional practices.” Discourse Studies 11: 131–152. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2013 Everyday Talk: Building and Reflecting Identities. 2nd ed. New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
van Dijk, Teun
2008 Discourse and Context. A Sociocognitive Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Watts, Richard J.
2003 Politeness. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Woodbury, H.
1984 “The Strategic Use of Questions in Court.” Semiotica 48: 197–228. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 2 other publications

Orthaber, Sara
2023. On (Im)politeness. In (Im)politeness at a Slovenian Call Centre [Advances in (Im)politeness Studies, ], ► pp. 11 ff. DOI logo
Tracy, Karen
2024. “Race Trouble”: Competing Accounts in a Trial About Anti-White Racism. Journal of Language and Social Psychology 43:1 ► pp. 14 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 23 march 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.