Keywords
defense lawyer
questions forms and functions
pragmatic
How to Cite
Abstract
In everyday conversation the questioners and answerers are in an approximately symmetrical relationship that questioners do not have the information that they are requesting and the answerers are not obliged to answer. On the contrary, in the rule and role governed courtroom question/answer dyad, lawyers usually have particular version of events to control the language of the respondents where witnesses are compelled to respond, and do not have the right to question. So, it may hold back the production and interpretation of the evidence, and consequently hinder the execution of the tasks of the court trial. Such types of courtroom language-related problems are unexplored by academic research in Oromia Regional State. In this regard, no or little is known about these courtroom language-related problems in the criminal courts of the region. In an attempt to fill-in the existing gap, this study investigates how widespread such courtroom linguistic problems are and contribute to the limited conceptual and methodological values of linguistic analysis of courtroom oral discourse in legal institutions of the region. The analysis of this study is based on the authentic, naturally occurring courtroom defense lawyers-witnesses dyad of some Oromia Regional State Criminal Courtrooms. The aim of the study is, therefore, to present the discursive strategies of defense lawyers questioning forms and functions in their attempts to deconstruct persuasive testimony. In so doing, based on the way in which lawyers exploit the specialized speech-exchange linguistic system of the courtroom, the study focuses on the analysis of defense lawyers question forms and functions from the pragma-dialectical discourse perspectives. The findings of the study suggest that the use of declarative question, tag question, and projection question forms are the defense lawyers’ discursive strategies to control and dominate the language of the witnesses. Such questioning forms function by potentially damaging witnesses’ admission and limiting their response boundaries and are found the influential defense lawyers’ discursive strategies through which the existing narratives of the witnesses are attacked and deconstructed.References
Aarts, B. 2001. English syntax and argumentation (second edition). New York: Palgrave Publishers Ltd.
Bennett, W. L. & Feldman, M. S. (1981). Reconstructing reality in the courtroom. London: Tavistock Publications.
Christophe, V.B. 2007. Ethiopia: Constitutional Protection of Ethnic Minorities at the Regional Level. Begium. Afrika focus, vol. 20, no. 1-2, 2007, 105-151.
Cotterill, J. 2003. Language and Power in Court: A Linguistic Analysis of the OJ Simpson Trial. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Drew, P. 1992. Contested Evidence in Courtroom Cross-Examination: The Case of a Trial for Rape. In Talk at Work, P. Drew and J. Heritage (eds). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Eades, D. 2008. Courtroom Talk and Neocolonial Control, Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Gibbons, J. 2003. Forensic Linguistics: An Introduction to Language in the Justice System. Malden, Mass.; Oxford: Blackwell Pub.
Gibbons, J. 2004. Language and the Law’, in A. Davies and C. Elder, The handbook of applied linguistics (eds). Blackwell Publishing Ltd, 285-303.
Gibbons, J. & M. T. Turell. 2008. Questioning in Common Law Criminal Courts. In Dimensions of forensic linguistics. The Netherlands: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 115-130.
Hale, S., B. 2004. The Discourse of Court Interpreting: Discourse practices of the law, the witness and the interpreter. John Benjamins B.V.
Heffer, C. 2005. The Language of Jury Trial: A Corpus-Aided Analysis of Legal–Lay Dicourse. Basingstoke/New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Hellinger, M. & A. Pauwels. 2007. Forensic Linguistics. In Handbook of Language and Communication: Diversity and Change. Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co. KG, D-10785, Berlin: 9: 429-458.
New York University. 2006. Guide to Foreign and International Legal Citations. New York University. School of Law: Journal of International Law and Politics.
Patton, M. Q. 1990. Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods. Newbury Park: Sage Publications.
Schegloff, Emanuel A. 1984. On Some Questions and Ambiguities in Conversation. In Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis, J. Maxwell Atkinson and John Heritage, eds., 28–52. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Schegloff, Emanuel A. 1992. Repair after Next Turn: The Last Structurally Provided-for Place for the Defense of Intersubjectivity in Conversation. American Journal of Sociology 95(5): 1295–1345.
Schegloff, Emanuel A. 2007. Primer for Conversation Analysis: Sequence Organization. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Shuy, R. W. 1990. ‘The analysis of tape recorded conversations’, in P.P. Andrews and M.B. Peterson (eds) Criminal Intelligence Analysis. Loomis, CA: Palmer Press, 117–48.
Shuy, R. W. 2006. Linguistics in the Courtroom: A Practical Guide. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Tkacuková, T. 2010. Lay People as Cross-Examiners: A Linguistic Analysis of the Li-bel Case McDonald’s Corporation v. Helen Steel and David Morris. Masaryk University, Faculty of Arts, Department of English and American Studies: Unpublished PhD Dissertation.
License
When submitting a paper the author agrees to the following publishing agreement and processing personal data.
PUBLICATION AGREEMENT, COPYRIGHT LICENSE, PERSONAL DATA PROCESSING CONSENT
This is a publication agreement and copyright license (“Agreement”) regarding a written manuscript currently submitted via Pressto platform
(“Article”) to be published in Comparative Legilinguistics International Journal for Legal Communication (“Journal”).
The parties to this Agreement are:
the Author or Authors of the submitted article (individually, or if more than one author, collectively, “Author”) and Comparative Legilinguistics International Journal for Legal Communication (“Publisher”), address al. Niepodległości 4, 61-874 Poznań, represented by its editor in chief Aleksandra Matulewska.
§1. LICENSE OF COPYRIGHT
a) The Author and the Publisher agree that the Author grants a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which is incorporated herein by reference and is further specified at Creative Commons — Attribution 4.0 International — CC BY 4.0 copyright license in the Article to the general public.
b) The Author grants to the Publisher a royalty-free, worldwide nonexclusive license to publish, reproduce, display, distribute, translate and use the Article in any form, either separately or as part of a collective work, including but not limited to a nonexclusive license to publish the Article in an issue of the Journal, copy and distribute individual reprints of the Article, authorize reproduction of the entire Article in another publication, and authorize reproduction and distribution of the Article or an abstract thereof by means of computerized retrieval systems (such as Westlaw, Lexis and SSRN). The Author retains ownership of all rights under copyright in the Article, and all rights not expressly granted in this Agreement.
c) The Author grants to the Publisher the power to assign, sublicense or otherwise transfer any and all licenses expressly granted to the Publisher under this Agreement.
d) Republication. The Author agrees to require that the Publisher be given credit as the original publisher in any republication of the Article authorized by the Author. If the Publisher authorizes any other party to republish the Article under the terms of paragraphs 1c and 1 of this Agreement, the Publisher shall require such party to ensure that the Author is credited as the Author.
§2. EDITING OF THE ARTICLE
a) The Author agrees that the Publisher may edit the Article as suitable for publication in the Journal. To the extent that the Publisher’s edits amount to copyrightable works of authorship, the Publisher hereby assigns all right, title, and interest in such edits to the Author.
§3. WARRANTIES
a) The Author represents and warrants that to the best of the Author’s knowledge the Article does not defame any person, does not invade the privacy of any person, and does not in any other manner infringe upon the rights of any person. The Author agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the Publisher against all such claims.
b) The Author represents and warrants that the Author has full power and authority to enter into this Agreement and to grant the licenses granted in this Agreement.
c) The Author represents and warrants that the Article furnished to the Publisher has not been published previously. For purposes of this paragraph, making a copy of the Article accessible over the Internet, including, but not limited to, posting the Article to a database accessible over the Internet, does not constitute prior publication so long as the as such copy indicates that the Article is not in final form, such as by designating such copy to be a “draft,” a “working paper,” or “work-in-progress”. The Author agrees to hold harmless the Publisher, its licensees and distributees, from any claim, action, or proceeding alleging facts that constitute a breach of any warranty enumerated in this paragraph.
§4. TERM
a) The agreement was concluded for an unspecified time.
§5. PAYMENT
a) The Author agrees and acknowledges that the Author will receive no payment from the Publisher for use of the Article or the licenses granted in this Agreement.
b) The Publisher agrees and acknowledges that the Publisher will not receive any payment from the Author for publication by the Publisher.
§6. ENTIRE AGREEMENT
a) This Agreement supersedes any and all other agreements, either oral or in writing, between the Author and the Publisher with respect to the subject of this Agreement. This Agreement contains all of the warranties and agreements between the parties with respect to the Article, and each party acknowledges that no representations, inducements, promises, or agreements have been made by or on behalf of any party except those warranties and agreements embodied in this Agreement.
b) In all cases not regulated by this Agreement, legal provisions of Polish Copyright Act and Polish Civil Code shall apply.
c) Any disputes arising from the enforcement of obligations connected with this Agreement shall be resolved by a court competent for the headquarters of the Publisher.
d) Any amendments or additions to the Agreement must be made in writing and signed by authorised representative of both parties, otherwise being ineffective.
e) This Agreement is signed electronically and the submission of the article via the PRESSto platform is considered as the conclusion of the Agreement by the Author and the Publisher.
f) Clause for consent to the processing of personal data - general
g) The Author shall give his or her consent to the processing of their personal data in accordance with the Act of 10 May 2018 on the protection of personal data and Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of persons physical in connection with the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46 / EC (General Data Protection Regulation) for the purpose and in connection with making publications available on the PRESSto scientific journals platform and DeGruyter platform, guaranteeing the security of services rendered, and improving them.
I HAVE READ AND AGREE FULLY WITH THE TERMS OF THIS AGREEMENT.
The Author The Publisher