Cover not available
Part of
Corpus-based Research on Variation in English Legal Discourse
Edited by Teresa Fanego and Paula Rodríguez-Puente
[Studies in Corpus Linguistics 91] 2019
► pp. 105–122

Chapter 5
A comparison of lexical bundles in spoken courtroom language across time, registers, and varieties

| Northern Arizona University
| Northern Arizona University
This chapter explores diachronic, register, and language varieties in courtroom language using three-word lexical bundles. Building on Culpeper and Kytö (2010), who described lexical bundles in Present Day English and Early Modern English trials, we explore the 1994 O. J. Simpson trial. Following Culpeper and Kytö, we identified the fifty most frequent bundles. After comparing bundles and functions to Culpeper and Kytö, we divided the O. J. Simpson trial into opening statement, direct examination, cross-examination, and closing argument. Results show the influence of situational similarities on the bundles that were found and also on the functions of the bundles. The results also show the importance of examining sub-registers that reflect important aspects of variation due to situational and functional goals.
Keywords: lexical bundles, spoken courtroom discourse, sub-registers, British English, American English
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Description of the corpora and method
    • 2.1Early Modern English trials
    • 2.2Present day English trials
    • 2.3The O. J. Simpson trial: Overview
      • 2.3.1Descriptions of the sub-registers in the O. J. Simpson corpus
    • 2.4Lexical bundles
  • 3.A comparison of three-word lexical bundles: O. J. Simpson, PDE, and EModE
    • 3.1The O. J. Simpson corpus versus the PDE and EModE corpora
    • 3.2Bundles shared in the three corpora
  • 4.Sub-registers in the O. J. Simpson trial
  • 5.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Note
  • References
  • Appendix
Published online: 6 February 2019
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.91.05rep
References (9)
References
Archer, Dawn. 2010. The historical courtroom. A diachronic investigation of English courtroom practice. In The Routledge Handbook of Forensic Linguistics, Malcolm Coulthard & Alison Johnson (eds), 185–198. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Biber, Douglas, Johansson, Stig, Leech, Geoffrey, Conrad, Susan & Finegan, Edward. 1999. Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. Harlow: Pearson Education.Google Scholar
Chen, Meishan. 2018. A Comparison of Language Used in High Profile Criminal Trials and TV Series Courtroom Trials. PhD dissertation, Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff.Google Scholar
. Under review. A multi-dimensional analysis of language used in high profile criminal trials and TV series courtroom trials.
Cotterill, Janet. 2003. Language and Power in Court. A Linguistic Analysis of the O. J. Simpson Trial. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Culpeper, Jonathan & Kytö, Merja. 2010. Early Modern English Dialogues: Spoken Interaction as Writing. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Forchini, Pierfranca. 2017. A multi-dimensional analysis of legal American English: Real-life and cinematic representations compared. International Journal of Language Studies 11(3):133–150.Google Scholar
Kytö, Merja & Walker, Terry. 2006. Guide to A Corpus of English Dialogues 1560–1760 [Studia Anglistica Upsaliensia 130]. Uppsala: Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis.Google Scholar
Linder, Douglas O. 2017. Famous Trials. <[URL]> (1 February 2017).