Forensic linguistics
Table of contents
Broadly defined, forensic linguistics is concerned with all points at which language and the law intersect and “draws on the scientific study of language to solve forensic problems” (McMenamin 2002: 41). Forensic linguistic work can approach language and the law from a range of perspectives; language-oriented (see Solan 1993; Tiersma 1999; Solan & Tiersma 2005), law-oriented (Gibbons 2003), with a social scientific approach (Conley & O’Barr 2005), with a focus on methodological developments, or from one that seeks to improve the quality of forensic linguistic evidence including its dissemination to courtroom and other legal audiences. Forensic linguistics as a discipline that also links up with wider concepts and themes such as ethics, power and vulnerability, and the inherent conflict within legal systems across the world between securing a conviction and protecting the rights of suspects, victims and witnesses. Much like many other interdisciplinary areas of linguistics and social sciences, forensic linguistics is not defined by the use of any one particular methodological framework; rather the most appropriate framework is applied to the type of data, the context in which it sits and the purpose of the analysis. The development of appropriate analytic techniques, or the modification of existing ones, is itself part of the work within the discipline. A feature of forensic linguistic research is that it is generally applied research that is used to examine interactional practices, to understand more about language and its use and application, or inform practice in some way. It is sometimes referred to as a branch of applied linguistics, and the nomenclatures applied linguistics and forensic linguistics are at times used interchangeably. Although there are no clear differentiating factors on methodological, conceptual or theoretical levels between applied and forensic linguistics, a key difference between the two is the latter’s specific focus on “the application of linguistic knowledge to a particular social setting, namely the legal forum (from which the word forensic is derived)” (Olsson 2008: 3).
References
Benneworth, K. M.
2010 “Negotiating paedophilia: How sexual offences are constructed in the investigative interview.” In The Routledge Handbook of Forensic Linguistics, ed. by M. Coulthard and A. Johnson, 139–154. Abingdon: Routledge.
Blackwell, S.
2012 “History of forensic linguistics.” In The Blackwell Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics, ed. by C. A. Chapelle. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
Böser, U.
2013 “‘So tell me what happened!’: Interpreting the free recall segment of the investigative interview’. Translation and Interpreting Studies 8 (1): 112–136.
Butters, R.
2010 “Trademark Linguistics – Trademarks: Language that one owns.” In The Routledge Handbook of Forensic Linguistics, ed. by M. Coulthard and A. Johnson, 351–364. Abingdon: Routledge.
Carter, E.
2008 Policing Talk: An Investigation into the Interaction of the Officer and the Suspect in the Police Interview. University of Essex PhD dissertation.
2011 Analysing Police Interviews: Laughter, Confessions and the Tape. London: Continuum.
2014 “When is a lie not a lie? When it’s divergent: Examining lies and deceptive responses in a police interview.” Language and Law (Linguagem e Direto) 1(1).
Conley, J. M. and W. M. O’Barr
2005 Just Words: Law, Language, and Power (2nd ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Coulthard, M.
2000 “Whose text is it? On the linguistic investigation of authorship.” In Discourse and Social Life, ed. by S. Sarangi and M. Coulthard, 270–287. London: Longman.
2004 “Author identification, idiolect and linguistic uniqueness.” Applied Linguistics 25 (4): 431–447. BoP
BoPCoulthard, M. and A. Johnson
2007 An Introduction to Forensic Linguistics: Language in Evidence. London: Routledge.
(eds) 2010 The Handbook of Forensic Linguistics. New York: Routledge.
Coulthard, M., T. Grant and K. Kredens
2011 “Forensic Linguistics.” In The SAGE Handbook of Sociolinguistics, ed. by R. Wodak, B. Johnstone, and P. L. Kerswill. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Department of Justice
2014 U. S. Departments of Justice and Commerce Name Experts to First-ever National Commission on Forensic Science. Washington: Department of Justice, Office of Public Affairs. www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2014/January/14-at-029.html. Last accessed 27/01/14.
D’hondt, S.
2010 “The cultural defense as courtroom drama: The enactment of identity, sameness and difference in criminal trial discourse.” Law and social enquiry 35 (1): 67–98.
Drew, P.
1992 “Contested evidence in courtroom cross-examination: The case of a trial for rape.” In Talk at Work: Interaction in Institutional Settings, ed. by P. Drew and J. Heritage, 470–520. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. BoP
Dumas, B. K.
2000 “US Pattern Jury Instructions: Problems and proposals.” The International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law 7 (1): 49–71.
Eades, D.
2000 “I don’t think it’s an answer to the question: Silencing Aboriginal witnesses in court.” Language in Society 29: 161–195. BoP
BoPGrant, T.
2010 “Txt 4n6: Idiolect free authorship analysis.” In The Routledge Handbook of Forensic Linguistics, ed. by M. Coulthard and A. Johnson, 508–522. Abingdon: Routledge.
Gibbons, J.
2003 Forensic Linguistics: An Introduction to Language in the Justice System. Oxford: Blackwell. BoP
Gibbons, J. and M. Teresa Turell
Haworth, K.
2010 “Police interviews in the judicial process: Police interviews as evidence.” In The Routledge Handbook of Forensic Linguistics, ed. by M. Coulthard, and A. Johnson, 169–181. Abingdon: Routledge.
Heffer, C.
2008 “The language and communication of jury instruction.” In Dimensions of Forensic Linguistics, ed. by J. Gibbons and M. Teresa Turell. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. BoP
BoPHeffer, C., F. Rock and J. Conley
2013 Legal-Lay Communication: Textual Travels in the Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Heydon, G.
2005 The Language of Police Interviewing: A Critical Analysis. Basingstoke: Palgrave.
Hofstra University 2014 Programme: Linguistics: Forensic Linguistics
http://bulletin.hofstra.edu/preview_program.php?catoid=50&poid=4895&returnto=2556. [Accessed 30/01/14.]
Holt, E. and A. Johnson
2010 “Socio-pragmatics of police interviews and trial discourse.” In The Routledge Handbook of Forensic Linguistics, ed. by M. Coulthard and A. Johnson. New York: Routledge.
IAFL
Kebbell, M. R. and D. C. Giles
2000 “Some experimental influences of lawyers’ complicated questions on eye-witness confidence and accuracy.” Journal of Psychology: Interdisciplinary and Applied 134: 129–139.
Kramer, G. and D. Koenig
1990 “Do jurors understand criminal jury instructions?” University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform 23 (3): 401–438.
Kredens, K.
2006 “On the status of linguistic evidence in litigation.” In Language, Communication, Information 1(1), ed. by P. Nowak and P. Nowakowski. Sorus Publishers: Poznan.
Kredens, K. and M. Coulthard
2012 “Corpus linguistics in authorship identification.” In The Oxford Handbook of Language and Law, ed. by P. Tiersma and L. Solan. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Kredens, K. and R. Morris
2010 “ ‘A Shattered Mirror?’ Interpreting in legal contexts outside the courtroom.” In The Routledge Handbook of Forensic Linguistics, ed. by M. Coulthard and A. Johnson. New York: Routledge.
Levi, J. N.
1993 “Evaluating jury comprehension of Illinois capital-sentencing instructions.” American Speech 68 (1): 20–49.
MacLeod, N.
2013 “Forensic linguistics: Overview.” In The Blackwell Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics, ed. by C. A. Chapelle. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
Matoesian, G.
2001 Law and the Language of Identity: Discourse in the William Kennedy Smith Rape Trial. Oxford: Oxford University Press. BoP
1993 Reproducing Rape Domination through Talk in the Courtroom. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. BoP
McMenamin, G. R.
2002 Forensic Linguistics: Advances in Forensic Stylistics. Florida: CRC Press.
Mitchell, E.
2008 The case for forensic linguistics. BBC News. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7600769.stm [Accessed 05/02/14.]
Olsson, J.
2004 Forensic Linguistics: An Introduction to Language, Crime, and the Law. London: Continuum.
2008 Forensic Linguistics (2nd edn). London: Continuum.
Police and Criminal Evidence Act (PACE)
1984 Codes of Practice. Order 1988. London: Her Majesty’s Stationery Office.
Rock, F.
2010 “Witnesses and suspects in interviews.” In The Routledge Handbook of Forensic Linguistics, ed. by M. Coulthard and A. Johnson, 138–152. New York: Routledge.
Shuy, R. W.
1999 The Language of Confession, Interrogation and Deception. London: Sage.
2002 Linguistic Battles in Trademark Disputes. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
2002 “Breaking into language and law: The trials of the insider-linguist.” In Round Table on Language and Linguistics: Linguistics, Language and the Professions, ed. by J. E. Alatis, H. E. Hamilton and A. Tan. Washington DC: Georgetown University Press.
Solan, L. M.
1993 The Language of Judges. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Solan, L. M. and P. M. Tiersma
2005 Speaking of Crime: The Language of Criminal Justice. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Sousa Silva, R., T. Grant and B. Maia
2010 “ ‘I didn’t mean to steal someone else’s words!’: A forensic linguistic approach to detecting intentional plagiarism.” 4th International Plagiarism Conference. Newcastle-upon-Tyne. http://archive.plagiarismadvice.org/documents/conference2010/papers/4IPC_0064_final.pdf [Accessed 10/02/14.]
Sousa Silva, R., G. Laboreiro, T. Grant, E. Oliveira and B. Maia
2011 “‘Twazn me!!! ;(’ Automatic authorship analysis of micro-blogging messages.” Natural Language Processing and Information Systems. Lecture Notes in Computer Science 6716: 161–168.
Storey-Whyte, K.
1997 “KISSing the Jury – the advantages and limitations of the ‘keep it simple’ principle in the presentation of expert evidence to courts and juries.” International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law 4: 280–286.
Stygall, G.
2010 “Complex documents/average and not-so-average readers.” In The Routledge Handbook of Forensic Linguistics, ed. by M. Coulthard and A. Johnson, 333–347. London: Routledge.
The Law Commission
2011 “Expert Evidence in Criminal Proceedings in England and Wales.” Law Com No. 325. London: The Stationery Office. http://www.officialdocuments.gov.uk/document/hc1011/hc08/0829/0829.pdf. [Accessed 10/02/14.]
Tiersma, P.
1999 Legal Language. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
2007 “The creation, structure and interpretation of legal text.” Language and the Law.org. http://www.languageandlaw.org/JURYINST.HTM [Accessed 11/02/14.]
Tiersma, P. M. and L. M. Solan
2002 “The linguist on the witness stand: Forensic linguistics in American courts.” Language 78: 221–39.
Tkačuková, T.
2010a “Lay people as cross-examiners: A linguistic analysis of the libel case McDonald’s Corporation v. Helen Steel and David Morris.” PhD Abstract. International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law X: 307–310.
2010b “Representing oneself. Cross-examination questioning: Lay people as cross-examiners.” In The Routledge Handbook of Forensic Linguistics, ed. by M. Coulthard and A. Johnson, 333–347. London: Routledge.
Wheatcroft, J. M., G. F. Wagstaff and M. R. Kebbell
2004 “The influence of courtroom questioning style on actual and perceived eyewitness confidence and accuracy.” Legal and Criminal Psychology 9: 83–101.