Book contents
- Meaning and Power in the Language of Law
- Meaning and Power in the Language of Law
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Contributors
- Acknowledgements
- Editors' Introduction
- Part I Sui generis or Socially Problematic: The Character of Legal Language
- Part II Imperfect Fit between Legal Categories and Social Discourse
- Part III Written in Silence: Hidden Social Meanings in Legal Discourse
- Part IV Conflict between Linguistic and Legal Ideologies
- Part V Demands of Law and Limits of Language
- Afterword
- Index
- References
Part IV - Conflict between Linguistic and Legal Ideologies
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 28 December 2017
Book contents
- Meaning and Power in the Language of Law
- Meaning and Power in the Language of Law
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Contributors
- Acknowledgements
- Editors' Introduction
- Part I Sui generis or Socially Problematic: The Character of Legal Language
- Part II Imperfect Fit between Legal Categories and Social Discourse
- Part III Written in Silence: Hidden Social Meanings in Legal Discourse
- Part IV Conflict between Linguistic and Legal Ideologies
- Part V Demands of Law and Limits of Language
- Afterword
- Index
- References
Summary
A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Meaning and Power in the Language of Law , pp. 205 - 256Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2018
References
References
Arenella, P. (1991). Convicting the morally blameless: Reassessing the relationship between legal and moral accountability. UCLA Law Review 39: 1511–1622.Google Scholar
Asch, S. (1946). Forming impressions of personality. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 41. 258–290.Google Scholar
Auld, R. E. (2001). Review of the Criminal Courts of England and Wales: Report. London: Stationery Office. Available online at http://www.criminal-courts-review.org.uk. Accessed 20 June 2005.Google Scholar
Bauman, R. and Briggs, C. L. (1990). Poetics and performance as critical perspectives on language and social life. Annual Review of Anthropology 19: 59–88.Google Scholar
Bhatia, V. K. (1994). Cognitive structuring in legislative provisions. In Gibbons, J. (ed.) Language and the Law. London: Longman, 136–155.Google Scholar
Carroll, L. (1898/2006). The Annotated Hunting of the Snark. New York: W.W. Norton and Co.Google Scholar
Dumas, B. (2000). US pattern jury instructions: Problems and proposals. Forensic Linguistics 7(1): 49–71.Google Scholar
Finkel, N. J. (2001). Commonsense Justice: Jurors' Notions of the Law. Cambridge, MA, and London: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Follingstad, D. R. and DeHart, D. D. (2000). Defining psychological abuse of husbands toward wives: Contexts, behaviors, and typologies. Journal of Interpersonal Violence 15(9): 891–920.Google Scholar
Guardian (2013a). Vicky Pryce trial: 10 questions jury asked the judge. The Guardian. 20 February. http://www.theguardian.com/law/2013/feb/20/vicky-pryce-trial-10-questions.Google Scholar
Guardian (2013b). Vicky Pryce jury can reach majority verdict, says judge. The Guardian. http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2013/feb/20/vicky-pryce-jury-can-reach-majority-verdict.Google Scholar
Gumperz, J. J. (1992). Contextualization revisited. In Auer, P. and Di Luzio, A. (eds.) The contextualization of language. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 39–53.Google Scholar
Heffer, C. (2006). Beyond ‘reasonable doubt’: The criminal standard of proof instruction as communicative act. The International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law 13(2): 159–188.Google Scholar
Heffer, C. (2007). The language of conviction and the convictions of certainty: Is ‘sure’ an impossible standard of proof? International Commentary on Evidence 5(1): Art. 5.Google Scholar
Heffer, C. (2013). Communication and magic: Authorized voice, legal-linguistic habitus and the recontextualization of ‘beyond reasonable doubt’. In Heffer, C., Rock, F. and Conley, J. M. (eds.) Legal-Lay Communication: Textual Travels in the Law. New York: Oxford University Press, 206–225.Google Scholar
Hymes, D. (1972). On communicative competence. In Pride, J. B. and Holmes, J. (eds.) Sociolinguistics: Selected Readings. Harmondsworth: Penguin, 269–293.Google Scholar
Hymes, D. (1996). Ethnography, Linguistics, Narrative Inequality: Toward an Understanding of Voice. London: Taylor and Francis.Google Scholar
JSB (1999). Crown Court Benchbook: Specimen Directions. London: Judicial Studies Board.Google Scholar
JSB (2010). Crown Court Benchbook: Directing the Jury. London: Judicial Studies Board.Google Scholar
Kalven, H. and Zeisel, H. (1971). The American Jury. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Lave, J. and Wenger, E. (1991). Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Littlejohn, R. (2013). After this farce, Huhne must wish that he'd pleaded not guilty too! Daily Mail Online. 21 February. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2282525/After-farce-Huhne-wish-hed-pleaded-guilty-too.html – ixzz2jZ0guhuXGoogle Scholar
Mertz, E. (1996). Consensus and dissent in U.S. legal opinion: Narrative structure and social voices. In Briggs, C. (ed.) Disorderly Discourse: Narrative, Conflict and Inequality. New York: Oxford University Press, 135–157.Google Scholar
OED (2017). OED Online. Oxford University Press, http://www.oed.com/. Retrieved 7 July 2017.Google Scholar
Pennington, N. and Hastie, R. (1991). A cognitive theory of juror decision making: The story model. Cardozo Law Review 13: 519–557.Google Scholar
Rayner, G. (2013). Vicky Pryce jurors given further directions by judge in speeding points case. The Daily Telegraph. 20 February. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/9882943/Vicky-Pryce-jurors-given-further-directions-by-judge-in-speeding-points-case.html.Google Scholar
Silverstein, M. (1998). Contemporary transformations of local linguistic communities. Annual Review of Anthropology 27: 401–426.Google Scholar
Sweeney, J. (2013a). ‘R -v- Vasiliki Pryce and Christopher Huhne: Sentencing remarks of Mr Justice Sweeney.’ Available at http://www.judiciary.gov.uk/media/judgments/2013/r-v-pryce-huhne-sentencing-remarks. Retrieved 7 March 2013.Google Scholar
Sweeney, J. (2013b). ‘R v Vasiliki Pryce – Reasons: Marital Coercion.’ Available at http://www.crimeline.info. Retrieved 7 March 2013.Google Scholar
Sweeney, J. (2013c). ‘Summing-up in R v Vasiliki Pryce.’ Available at http://www.crimeline.info/news/pryce-jury-summing-up. Retrieved 7 March 2013.Google Scholar
Tedlock, D. (1983). Spoken Word and the Work of Interpretation. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Thomas, C. (2010). Are Juries Fair? Ministry of Justice Research Series 1/10, Available at http://www.justice.gov.uk/publications/research.htm.Google Scholar
Thomas, C. (2014). Exposing the myth of jury research. Criminal Law & Justice Weekly. 9 December. http://www.criminallawandjustice.co.uk/features/Exposing-Myth-Jury-Research.Google Scholar
Tiersma, P. (2001). The rocky road to legal reform: Improving the language of jury instructions. Brooklyn Law Review 66. 1081–1099.Google Scholar
Voloshinov, V. N. (1973). Marxism and the Philosophy of Language. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
References
Athanassiou, P. (2006). The Application of Multilingualism in the European Union Context. Legal Working Paper Series No. 2, European Central Bank (ECB).Google Scholar
Attorney General's Chambers Hong Kong (1986). Discussion Paper on the Laws in Chinese.Google Scholar
Baaij, C. J. W. (2014). Translation and the ‘Contamination’ of Comparative Legal Research. In Glanert, S. (ed.) Comparative Law – Engaging Translation. Oxon and New York: Routledge, 104–122.Google Scholar
Baaij, C. J. W. (forthcoming). Legal Integration and Language Diversity: The Case for Source-Oriented EU Translation.Google Scholar
Bassnett, S. and Lefevere, A. (1990). Proust's Grandmother and the Thousand and One Nights: The ‘Cultural Turn’ in Translation Studies. In Bassnett, S. and Lefevere, A. (eds.) Translation, History and Culture. London: Pinter, 1–13.Google Scholar
Beaupré, M. R. (1986). Interpreting Bilingual Legislation (2nd ed.). Toronto: Carswell.Google Scholar
Berk-Seligson, S. ([1990] 2002). The Bilingual Courtroom: Court Interpreters in the Judicial Process. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Biel, L. (2007). Translation of Multilingual EU Law as a Sub-genre of Legal Translation. In Kierzkowska, D. (ed.) Court Interpreting and Legal Translation in the Enlarged Europe. Warszawa: Translegis.Google Scholar
Cao, D. (2007). Translating Law. Clevedon, Buffalo, and Toronto: Multilingual Matters Ltd.Google Scholar
Conley, J. M., O'Barr, W. M. and Lind, E. A. (1978). The Power of Language: Presentational Style in the Courtroom, Duke Law Journal 6: 1375–1399.Google Scholar
Fenton, S. and Moon, P. (2002). The Translation of the Treaty of Waitangi: A Case of Disempowerment. In Gentzler, E. and Tymoczko, M. (eds.) Translation and Power. Amherst and Boston: University of Massachusetts Press, 25–44.Google Scholar
Gentzler, E. and Tymoczko, M. (2002). Introduction. In Gentzler, E. and Tymoczko, M. (eds.) Translation and Power. Amherst and Boston: University of Massachusetts Press, xi–xxviii.Google Scholar
Glanert, S. (2014). Translation Matters. In Glanert, S. (ed.) Comparative Law – Engaging Translation. Oxon and New York: Routledge, 1–19.Google Scholar
Hermans, T. (ed.) (1985). The Manipulation of Literature: Studies in Literary Translation. London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
Jin, D. and Nida, E. (2006). On Translation: An Expanded Edition. Hong Kong: City University of Hong Kong Press.Google Scholar
Lai, A. K. P. and Li, A. S. L. (2012). Through the Looking Glass: What a Reader of Hong Kong Legislation Found There. The Loophole – Journal of the Commonwealth Association of Legislative Counsel, issue 1. Available at http://www.opc.gov.au/calc/docs/Loophole/Loophole_Jan12.pdf; last accessed on 18 March 2016.Google Scholar
Leung, H. C. J. (2016). Negotiating Language Status in Multilingual Jurisdictions: Rhetoric and Reality. Semiotica 209: 371–396.Google Scholar
Leung, H. C. J. (forthcoming). Shallow Equality and Symbolic Jurisprudence in Multilingual Legal Orders. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
L'Heureux–Dubé, C. (2002). Bijuralism: A Supreme Court of Canada Justice's Perspective. Louisiana Law Review 62(2): 449–466.Google Scholar
McAuliffe, K. (2012). Language and Law in the European Union: The Multilingual Jurisprudence of the ECJ. In Tiersma, P. M. and Solan, L. M. (eds.) The Oxford Handbook of Language and Law. New York: Oxford University Press, 200–216.Google Scholar
Mulligan, C., Douma, M., Lind, H. and Quinn, B. P. (2014). Founding-Era Translations of the Constitution. Constitutional Commentary (forthcoming); Brooklyn Law School, Legal Studies Paper No. 402. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2486301 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2486301Google Scholar
Ng, K. H. (2009). The Common Law in Two Voices: Language, Law and the Post-Colonial Predicament in Hong Kong. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Ng, K. H. (2014). Legal Translation and the Problem of Hereoglossia. In Glanert, S. (ed.) Comparative Law – Engaging Translation. Oxon and New York: Routledge, 49–66.Google Scholar
Nouss, A. (2014). Translation as Ethics. In Glanert, S. (ed.) Comparative Law – Engaging Translation. Oxon and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
O'Barr, W. M. (1982). Linguistic Evidence: Language, Power, and Strategy in the Courtroom. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Poon, W. Y. E. (2005). The Cultural Transfer in Legal Translation. International Journal for the Semiotics of Law 18: 307–323.Google Scholar
Powell, R. (2004). Terminological Creation and Language Shift in Malaysia's Legal System. Current Issues in Language Planning 5(2): 109–130.Google Scholar
Reiß, K. and Vermeer, H. J. (2014). Towards a General Theory of Translational Action. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Šarčević, S. (1997). New Approach to Legal Translation. The Hague: Kluwer Law International.Google Scholar
Shelton, D. (1996). Reconcilable Differences? The Interpretation of Multilingual Treaties. Hastings International and Comparative Law Review, 20: 611–638.Google Scholar
The Washington Post, 17 March 2011, New Bible draws critics of gender-neutral language. Available at http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/03/17/AR2011031703434.htmlGoogle Scholar
van Els, T. J. M. (2001). The European Union, Its Institutions and Its Languages: Some Language Political Observations. Current Issues in Language Planning 2(4): 311–360.Google Scholar
Venuti, L. (1994). Translation and the Formation of Cultural Identities. Current Issues in Language and Society 1(3): 201–217.Google Scholar
Venuti, L. (1998). The Scandals of Translation. Towards an Ethics of Difference. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Vermeer, H. J. (1996). A Skopos Theory of Translation. Heidelberg: TEXTconTEXT-Verlag.Google Scholar
Wagner, A. and Cheng, L. (eds.) (2011). Exploring Courtroom Discourse: The Language of Power and Control. Surrey, England, and Burlington, VT: Ashgate.Google Scholar
Wagner, A., Sin, K. K. and Cheng, L. (2014). Legal Translatability Process as the “Third Space” – Insights into Theory and Practice. In Cheng, L., Sin, K. K. and Wagner, A. (eds.) The Ashgate Handbook of Legal Translation. Surrey, England, and Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 1–11.Google Scholar
Wolff, L. (2011). Legal Translation. In Malmkjer, K. and Windle, K. (eds.) The Oxford Handbook of Translation Studies. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 228–242.Google Scholar
Zhao, Y. H. (2001). ‘Drafting Policy On Bilingual Legislation – Comments on the Hong Kong Securities and Futures Bill’. LC Paper No. CB(2) 1136/00–01 (01). Available at www.legco.gov.hk/yr00–01/english/panels/ajls/papers/b1136e01.pdf; last accessed 18 March 2016.Google Scholar