The consequences and effects of language transformations in legal discourse

References

Aron, R., K. T. Duffy, & J. L. Rosner. 1989. Cross-examination of witnesses: The litigator’s puzzle. Colorado Springs, CO: McGraw-Hill.Search in Google Scholar

Berk-Seligson, Susan. 1999. The impact of court interpreting on the coerciveness of leading questions. Forensic Linguistics 6(1). 30–56.10.1558/sll.1999.6.1.30Search in Google Scholar

Berk-Seligson, Susan. 2002. The bilingual courtroom: Court interpreters in the judicial process. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.10.7208/chicago/9780226923277.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Broden, Thomas F. 2013. Text theory. In Marcel Danesi (ed.), Encyclopedia of media and communication, 651–681. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Search in Google Scholar

Bronstein, Victoria. 1994. The rape complainant in court: An analysis of legal discourse. Acta Juridica 202. 202–227.Search in Google Scholar

Brown, Penelope & Stephen Levinson. 1978. Universals in language use: Politeness phenomena. In E. Goody (ed.), Questions and politeness: Strategies in social interaction, 56–289. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Burns, Robert P. 2006. A wistful retrospective on Wigmore and his prescriptions for Illinois evidence law. Northwestern University Law Review 100(1). 131–150.Search in Google Scholar

Characteristics of legal discourse. 2013. http://www.proz.com/forum/legal/22301-characteristics_of_legal_discourse.html (accessed 2 December 2015).Search in Google Scholar

Crystal, David. 2001. A dictionary of language, 2nd edn. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Search in Google Scholar

Danesi, Marcel. 2000. Encyclopedic dictionary of semiotics, media, and communications. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.10.3138/9781442674448Search in Google Scholar

Danesi, Marcel. 2009. Dictionary of media and communications. Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe.Search in Google Scholar

Danesi, Marcel. 2013. Discourse. In Marcel Danesi (ed.), Encyclopedia of media and communication, 241–244. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.10.3138/9781442695528Search in Google Scholar

Danesi, Marcel & Paul Perron. 1999. Analyzing cultures: An introduction and handbook. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Danet, Brenda & Bryna Bogoch. 1980. Context for coercion: Analyzing properties of courtroom “questions”. British Journal of Law and Society 7(1). 60–77.10.2307/1409754Search in Google Scholar

Danet, Brenda & Nicole C. Kermish. 1978. Courtroom questioning: A sociolinguistic perspective. In L. N. Massery II (ed.), Psychology and persuasion in advocacy, 412–441. Washington, DC: Association of Trial Lawyers of America, National College of Advocacy.Search in Google Scholar

Eades, Diana. 2010. Sociolinguistics and the legal process. Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.10.21832/9781847692559Search in Google Scholar

Eco, Umberto. 2000. Experiences in translation. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Search in Google Scholar

Ekman, Paul & Wallace V. Friesen. 1969. The repertoire of nonverbal behavior: Categories, origins, usage, and coding. Semiotica 1. 49–98.10.1515/9783110880021.57Search in Google Scholar

Grice, H. P. 1975. Logic and conversation. In Peter Cole & Jerry Morgan (eds.), Syntax and semantics 3: Speech acts, 41–48. New York: Academic Press.10.1163/9789004368811_003Search in Google Scholar

Hale, Sandra. 2004. The discourse of court interpreting: Discourse practices of the law, the witness and the interpreter. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/btl.52Search in Google Scholar

Hymes, Dell. 1974. Foundations in sociolinguistics: An ethnographic approach. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.Search in Google Scholar

Jakobson, Roman. 1990. The speech event and the functions of language. In Linda R. Waugh & Monique Monville-Burston (eds.), On language, 69–79. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Kevelson, Roberta. 2010. Law. In Thomas A. Sebeok & Marcel Danesi (eds.), Encyclopedic dictionary of semiotics, 3rd edn., vol. 1, 444–449. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Search in Google Scholar

Knight, B., J. Ma & E. Nissan. 1998. Representing temporal knowledge in legal discourse. Information & Communications Technology 7(3). 199–211.10.1080/13600834.1998.9965791Search in Google Scholar

Lakoff, George & Mark Johnson. 1980. Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Search in Google Scholar

Nuessel, Frank. 2000. Linguistics, language and the law. In Scott Simpkins, C. W. Spinks, & John Deely (eds.), Semiotics 1999, 185–196. New York: Peter Lang.10.5840/cpsem199917Search in Google Scholar

Nuessel, Frank. 2003. Translation – A semiotic perspective. In Scott Simpkins & John Deely (eds.), Semiotics 2001, 311–324. Ottawa: Legas.10.5840/cpsem200122Search in Google Scholar

Nuessel, Frank. 2014. Lying – A semiotic perspective. In Jamin Pelkey & Leonard Sbrocchi (eds.). Semiotics 151–162. Ottawa: Legas.10.5840/cpsem201314Search in Google Scholar

Ogle, R., A. Parkman, & J. Porter. 1980. Questions: Leading and otherwise: A framework for judicial discretion. Judges Journal 19(3). 42–45.Search in Google Scholar

Perron, Paul. 2013. Narrative. In Marcel Danesi (ed.), Encyclopedia of media and communication, 482–485. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Search in Google Scholar

Reidy, David A., Jr. 1990–1991. The law, dominant paradigms, and legal education. Kansas Law Review 39. 415–459.Search in Google Scholar

Rigney, Azocena C. 1999. Questioning in interpreted testimony. Forensic Linguistics 6(1). 83–108.10.1558/sll.1999.6.1.83Search in Google Scholar

Russel, Debra. 2004. Interpreting strategies in legal discourse. In Cecilia Wadensjö, Birgitta Englund Dimitrova & Anna-Lena Nilsson (eds.), Professionalization of interpreting in the community (International Conference Critical Link 4), 1–10. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Search in Google Scholar

Schegloff, Emanuel A. & Harvey Sacks. 1973. Opening up closings. Semiotica 8. 289–327.10.1515/semi.1973.8.4.289Search in Google Scholar

Searle, John. 1969. Speech acts: An essay on the philosophy of language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139173438Search in Google Scholar

Trinch, Shonna. 2003. Latinas’ narratives of domestic violence: Discrepant versions of violence. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/impact.17Search in Google Scholar

White, James Boyd. 1985. Law as rhetoric, rhetoric as law: The art of cultural and communal life. University of Chicago Law Review 52. 684–702.10.2307/1599632Search in Google Scholar

Wichman, Nanette L. 2002. Meaning in legal discourse: Beyond the lexicon. Honolulu: University of Hawaii.Search in Google Scholar

Wigmore, H. 1942. A treatise on the Anglo-American system of evidence in trials at common law: Including the statutes and judicial decisions of all jurisdictions of the United States and Canada, 3rd edn. Boston, MA: Little, Brown and Company.Search in Google Scholar

Woodbury, Hanni. 1984. The strategic use of questions in court. Semiotica 48(3/4). 197–228.10.1515/semi.1984.48.3-4.197Search in Google Scholar