Language and the Law

Philipp Sebastian Angermeyer
Table of contents

Language and law is an interdisciplinary field of inquiry that brings together researchers working from a range of different perspectives, especially legal scholars concerned with the role of language in the legal process as well as discourse analysts and sociolinguists who have found legal settings to be a prime site for the investigation of power and inequality in spoken interaction. The field also overlaps to some degree with related fields such as legal anthropology and law and society studies, and it encompasses research in the field of forensic linguistics, in which linguistic analysis is used to address questions of law or law enforcement. In fact, many linguists have been drawn into the study of language and law after being consulted as linguistic experts by legal professionals, for example to identify or characterize a particular linguistic variety, to assess the comprehensibility of a text, or to evaluate the similarity of names in trademark disputes (see e.g. Tiersma & Solan 2002). Much of this research in language and law falls into the field of pragmatics, which will be the focus of this chapter, especially the investigation of spoken interaction in legal settings and the role of speech act theory.

Full-text access is restricted to subscribers. Log in to obtain additional credentials. For subscription information see Subscription & Price.

References

Ainsworth, J.
2008 ‘You have the right to remain silent…’ but only if you ask for it just so: the role of linguistic ideology in American police interrogation law. The International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law 15: 1–21. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Angermeyer, P.S.
2009 Translation style and participant roles in court interpreting. Journal of Sociolinguistics 13: 3–28. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Atkinson, J.M. & P. Drew
1979 Order in Court: The Organization of Verbal Interaction in Judicial Settings. Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Austin, J.L.
1975 How to do things with words. Clarendon Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Berk-Seligson, S.
1990 The Bilingual Courtroom: Court Interpreters in the Judicial Process. University of Chicago Press. Google Scholar
2009 Coerced Confessions: The Discourse of Bilingual Police Interrogations. Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bhatia, V.K., C.N. Candlin, J. Engberg & A. Trosborg
(eds) 2003a Multilingual and multicultural contexts of legislation: An international perspective. Peter Lang. Google Scholar
Bhatia, V.K., C.N. Candlin & M. Gotti
(eds) 2003b Legal discourse in multilingual and multicultural contexts: Arbitration texts in Europe. Peter Lang.  TSBGoogle Scholar
Blommaert, J.
2001 Investigating narrative inequality: African asylum seekers’ stories in Belgium. Discourse & Society 12: 413–49. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bucholtz, M.
2009 Captured on tape: professional hearing and competing entextualizations in the criminal justice system. Text & Talk 29: 503–23. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chang, Y.
2004 Courtroom questioning as a culturally situated persuasive genre of talk. Discourse & Society 15: 705–72. DOI logo  BoPGoogle Scholar
Conley, J.M. & W.M. O'barr
1990 Rules versus relationships: The ethnography of legal discourse. University of Chicago Press. Google Scholar
2005 Just Words: Law, Language, and Power. University of Chicago Press. Google Scholar
Cotterill, J.
2003 Language and Power in Court: A Linguistic Analysis of the O.J. Simpson Trial.  BoPGoogle Scholar
2004 Collocation, connotation, and courtroom semantics: Lawyers’ control of witness testimony through lexical negotiation. Applied Linguistics 25: 513–37. DOI logo  BoPGoogle Scholar
Coulthard, M.
2002 Whose voice is it? Invented and concealed dialogue in written records of verbal evidence produced by the police. In J. Cotterill (ed.) Language in the Legal Process, 19–34. Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
D'hondt, S.
2009 Others on trial: The construction of cultural otherness in Belgian first instance criminal hearings. Journal of Pragmatics 41: 806–28. DOI logo  BoPGoogle Scholar
Danet, B.
1980 “Baby” or “fetus”? Language and the construction of reality in a manslaughter trial. Semiotica 32: 187–219. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Danet, B., K. Hoffman, N. Kermish, H.J. Rafn & D. Stayman
1980 An Ethnography of Questioning in the Courtroom. In R. Shuy & A. Shnukal (eds.) Language Use and the Uses of Language, NWAVE 5 1976, 222–34. Georgetown University Press.  BoPGoogle Scholar
Drew, P.
1992 Contested evidence in courtroom cross-examination: The case of a trial for rape. In P. Drew & J. Heritage (eds.) Talk at work: Interaction in institutional settings, 470–520. Cambridge University Press.  BoPGoogle Scholar
Drew, P. & J. Heritage
1992 Analyzing talk at work: An introduction. In P. Drew & J. Heritage (eds.) Talk at work: Interaction in institutional settings, 3–65. Cambridge University Press.  BoPGoogle Scholar
Dumas, B.
2000 US pattern jury instructions: Problems and proposals. Forensic Linguistics 7: 49–71. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Duranti, A.
1992 Intensions, Self, and Responsibility: An Essay in Samoan Ethnopragmatics. In J.H. Hill & J.T. Irvine (eds.) Responsibility and Evidence in Oral Discourse, 24–47. Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar
Eades, D.
2008 Courtroom talk and neocolonial control. Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logo  BoPGoogle Scholar
Ehrlich, S.
2001 Representing rape: language and sexual consent. Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ehrlich, S. & J. Sidnell
2006 “I think that's not an assumption you ought to make”: Challenging presuppositions in inquiry testimony. Language in Society 35: 655–76. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Freed, A.F. & S. Ehrlich (eds)
2010 “Why do you ask?” The Function of Questions in Institutional Discourse. Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
Galatolo, R. & P. Drew
2006 Narrative expansions as defensive practices in courtroom testimony. Text & Talk 26: 661–98. DOI logo  BoPGoogle Scholar
Grice, H.P.
1975 Logic and Conversation. In P. Cole & J.L. Morgan (eds.) Syntax and Semantics. Vol. 3: Speech Acts, 41–58. Academic Press. Google Scholar
Gumperz, J.J.
1982 Fact and Inference in courtroom testimony. In J.J. Gumperz (ed.) Language and Social Identity, 163–95. Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar
2001 Contextualization and Ideology in Intercultural Communication. In A. Di Luzio, S. Günthner & F. Orletti (eds.) Culture in Communication: Analyses of Intercultural situations, 35–53. John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hale,S.
2004 The Discourse of Court Interpreting: Discourse Practices of the Law, the Witness and the Interpreter. Benjamins. DOI logo  BoPGoogle Scholar
Haviland, J.B.
2003 Ideologies of language: Reflections on language and U.S. law. American Anthropologist 105: 764–74. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heffer, C.
2005 The Language of Jury Trial: A Corpus-Aided Analysis of Legal-Lay Discourse. Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2006 Beyond ‘Reasonable Doubt’: The Criminal Standard of Proof Instruction As Communicative Act. The International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law 13: 159–88. Google Scholar
Hirsch, S.F.
1998 Pronouncing and Persevering: gender and the discourses of disputing in an African Islamic court. University of Chicago Press. Google Scholar
Jacquemet, M.
1996 Credibility in Court: Communicative Practices in the Camorra Trials. Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar
Komter, M.L.
1994 Accusations and defenses in courtroom interaction. Discourse & Society 5: 165–87. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1998 Dilemmas in the courtroom: a study of trials of violent crime in the Netherlands. Lawrence Erlbaum. Google Scholar
Labov, W.
1988 The judicial testing of linguistic theory. In D. Tannen (ed.) Linguistics in Context: Connecting Observations and Understanding, 159–82. Ablex.Google Scholar
Lakoff, R.
1973 Language and woman's place. Language in Society 2: 45–80. DOI logo  BoPGoogle Scholar
Language And National Origin Group
2004 Guidelines for the use of language analysis in relation to questions of national origin in refugee cases. International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law 11: 261–66. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Liberman, K.
1981 Understanding Aborigines in Australian courts of law. Human Organization 40: 247–55. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lippi-Green, R.
1994 Accent, standard language ideology and discriminatory pretext in the courts. Language in Society 18: 213–34. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Maryns, K.
2006 The Asylum Speaker: Language in the Belgian Asylum Procedure. St. Jerome Publishing Ltd.Google Scholar
Matoesian, G.M.
1993 Reproducing rape: Domination through talk in the courtroom. Chicago University Press. Google Scholar
2001 Law and the Language of Identity: Discourse in the William Kennedy Smith Rape Trial. Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
Mertz, E.
2007 The Language of Law School: Learning to “Think Like a Lawyer”. Oxford University Press. DOI logo  BoPGoogle Scholar
Moore, S.F.
(ed.) 2005 Law and Anthropology: A Reader. Blackwell.Google Scholar
Morris, R.
2008 Missing stitches: An overview of judicial attitudes to interlingual interpreting in the criminal justice systems of Canada and Israel. Interpreting 10: 34–64. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
O'barr, W.M.
1982 Linguistic Evidence: Language, Power, and Strategy in the Courtroom. Academic Press. Google Scholar
Philips, S.U.
1998 Ideology in the language of judges: How judges practice law, politics, and courtroom control. Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
Raymond, G.
2003 Grammar and social organization: Yes/no interrogatives and the structure of responding. American Sociological Review 68: 939–67. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Richland, J.B.
2008 Arguing with tradition: the language of law in Hopi Tribal court. University of Chicago Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rock, F.
2007 Communicating Rights: The Language of Arrest and Detention. Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sarangi, S.K. & S. Slembrouck
1992 Non-cooperation in communication: A reassessment of Gricean pragmatics. Journal of Pragmatics 17: 117–54. DOI logo  BoPGoogle Scholar
Shuy, R.
1996 Language Crimes: The use and abuse of language evidence in the Courtroom. Blackwell.  BoPGoogle Scholar
1997 Ten unanswered language questions about Miranda. Forensic Linguistics 4: 175–95. Google Scholar
Sidnell, J.
2010 The Design and Positioning of Questions in Inquiry Testimony. In A.F. Freed & S. Ehrlich (eds.) “Why do you ask?” The Function of Questions in Institutional Discourse, 20–41. Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
Singler, J.V.
2004 The linguistic asylum interview and the linguist's evaluation of it: Liberian applicants for political asylum in Switzerland. International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law 11: 222–39. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Solan, L.
1993 The language of judges. University of Chicago Press. DOI logo  BoPGoogle Scholar
Solan, L. & P. Tiersma
2005 Speaking of crime: The language of criminal justice. University of Chicago Press. Google Scholar
Stokoe, E. & D. Edwards
2010 Asking ostensibly silly questions in police-suspect interrogations. In A.F. Freed & S. Ehrlich (eds.) “Why do you ask?” The Function of Questions in Institutional Discourse, 108–32. Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
Sullivan, R.
2004 The challenges of interpreting multilingual, multijural legislation. Brooklyn Journal of International Law 29: 986–1066. Google Scholar
Tiersma, P.
1999 Legal language. University of Chicago Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tiersma, P. & L. Solan
2002 The linguist on the witness stand: Forensic linguistics in American courts. Language 78: 221–39. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Trinch, S.L.
2003 Latinas’ Narratives of Domestic Abuse: Discrepant versions of violence. John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Walker, A.G.
1990 Language at work in the law: the customs, conventions, and appelate consequences of court reporting. In J.N. Levi & A.G. Walker (eds.) Language in the Judicial Process, 247–77. Plenum. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Woodbury, H.
1984 The strategic use of questions in court. Semiotica 48: 197–228. DOI logoGoogle Scholar