Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-lrblm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-07T11:34:10.360Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Courtroom Discourse and the Gendered Construction of Professional Identity

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 December 2018

Bryna Bogoch
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In addition to providing an arena for dispute resolution, the courtroom serves lawyers and judges as an important site for the construction and maintenance of their Professional identity. It is mainly through the strategic use of language within the constraints on courtroom discourse that this process takes place. Within the framework of feminist theories of language as constituent of social identity, this paper analyzes courtroom interaction to determine how gender affects the construction of the Professional identity of lawyers and judges in Israeli district courts. Quantitative analyses of terms of address, intrusions, judges’ takeover of examinations, challenging comments, and the forms and use of directives indicated that women judges and women lawyers were accorded less deference than men, and that the Professional competence of women lawyers was challenged and undermined. The qualitative analysis of the off-the-record comments by judges, lawyers, and witnesses to lawyers revealed that all participants questioned the professional performance of women lawyers in gender-stereotypic ways. The devaluation of women professionals and the gendered interpretations of their behavior enacted through the discourse in the courtroom may have implications for the outcomes of trials.

Type
Articles
Information
Law & Social Inquiry , Volume 24 , Issue 2 , Spring 1999 , pp. 329 - 375
Copyright
Copyright © American Bar Foundation, 1999 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adelsward, Viveka. 1988. Styles of Success: On Impression Management as Collaborative Action in Job Interviews. Linkoping, Sweden: University Of Linkoping.Google Scholar
Ahrens, Ulrike. 1997. The Interplay Between Interruptions and Preference Organization in Conversation: New Perspectives on a Classic Topic of Gender Research. In Kotthoff and Wodak 1997.Google Scholar
Ainsworth, Janet E. 1993. The Pragmatics of Powerlessness in Police Interrogation. Yale Law Journal 103:259–322.Google Scholar
Allen, Reginald. 1975. The Trial of Socrates: A Study in the Morality of the Criminal Process. In Courts and Trials: A Multi-Disciplinary Approach, ed. Friedland, M. L. Toronto: University Of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
Ariel, Mira. 1989. Female and Male Stereotypes in Israeli Literature and Media: Evidence from Introductory Patterns. Language and Communication 9:43–69.Google Scholar
Ariel, Mira, and Giora, Rahel. 1992. Gender Versus Group: Relation Analysis of Impositive Speech Acts. In Locating Power: Proceedings of the Second Berkeley Women and Language Conference, ed. Hall, K., Bucholtz, M., and Moonwoman, B. Berkeley, Calif.: Berkeley Women and Language Group.Google Scholar
Atkinson, J. Maxwell. 1992. Displaying Neutrality: Formal Aspects of Informal Court Proceedings. In Drew and Heritage 1992a.Google Scholar
Atkinson, J. Maxwell, and Drew, Paul. 1979. Order in Court. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Banakar, Reza. In press. The “Holy Grail” of Law in Society. Retfaerd, Nordisk juridisk tidsskrift 73.Google Scholar
Barak, Aharon. 1992. The Israeli System of Law: Tradition and Culture (in Hebrew). Hapraklit 40(2):197–217.Google Scholar
Bennett, W. Lance, and Martha, S. Feldman. 1981. Reconstructing Reality in the Courtroom. New Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers University Press.Google Scholar
Blumberg, Abraham S. 1974. Criminal Justice. New York: Franklin Watts.Google Scholar
Blum-Kulka, Shoshana, and House, Juliane. 1989. Cross Cultural and Situational Variation in Requesting Behavior. In Cross-Cultural Pragmatics, ed. Blum-Kulka, S., House, J., and Kasper, G. Norwood, N.J.: Ablex.Google Scholar
Bogoch, Bryna. 1991. The Dynamics of Power: A Sociolinguistic Analysis of Lawyer-Client Interaction in a Legal Aid Office. Ph.D. diss., Communications Institute, Hebrew University, Jerusalem, Israel.Google Scholar
Bogoch, Bryna. 1994a. The Dynamics of Power: Lawyer-Client Interaction in a Legal Aid Office. In Legal Semiotics and the Sociology of Law, ed. Jackson, B. S. Onati, Spain: Onati International Institute for the Sociology of Law.Google Scholar
Bogoch, Bryna. 1994b. Power, Distance, and Solidarity: Models of Professional-Client Interaction in an Israeli Legal Aid Setting. Discourse and Society 5(1):65–88.Google Scholar
Bogoch, Bryna. 1997. Gendered Lawyering: Difference and Dominance in Lawyer-Client Interaction. Law and Society Review 31(4):677–712.Google Scholar
Bogoch, Bryna, and Don-Yechiya, Rochelle. 1996. Gender and the Administration of Justice in Israel. Final report presented to the Ford Foundation. Jerusalem: Jerusalem Institute of Israel Research. In press in Hebrew.Google Scholar
Brown, Penelope, and Levinson, Stephen. 1987. Politeness: Some Universals in Language Use. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Brown, Roger, and Ford, Marguerite. 1964. Address in American English. In Language in Culture and Society, ed. Hymes, D. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
Bulow-Moller, Anne Marie. 1990. The Notion of Coercion in Courtroom Questioning. In Proceedings of the Nordtext Conference, 1990. Helsinki, Finland: Abo Academy Press.Google Scholar
Bulow-Moller, Anne Marie. 1991. Trial Evidence: Overt and Covert Communication in Court. International Journal Of Applied Linguistics 1:38–60.Google Scholar
Carlen, Pat, and Worrall, Anne. 1987. Gender Crime and Justice. London: Open University.Google Scholar
Cerulo, Karen A. 1997. Identity Construction: New Issues, New Directions. Annual Review of Sociology 23:385–400.Google Scholar
Cook-Gumperz, Jenny. 1995. Reproducing the Discourse of Mothering: How Gendered Talk Makes Gendered Lives. In Hall and Bucholtz 1995.Google Scholar
Danet, Brenda. 1980. Language in the Legal Process. Law and Society Review 14:445–565.Google Scholar
Danet, Brenda. 1990. Language and the Law: An Overview of 15 Years of Research. In Hondbook of Language and Social Psychology, ed. Giles, H. and Robinson, W. P., 537–60. London: Wiley.Google Scholar
Danet, Brenda, and Bogoch, Bryna. 1980a. Communication and Procedural Justice in American and Israeli Criminal Trials. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting, Law and Society Association, Madison, Wis.Google Scholar
Danet, Brenda, and Bogoch, Bryna. 1980b. “Fixed Fight or Free-For-All”? An Empirical Study of Combativeness in the Adversary System of Justice. British Journal of Law and Society 7:36–60.Google Scholar
Danet, Brenda, Kenneth Hoffman, B., Nicole Kermish, C., Rafn, Jeffrey, and Stayman, Deborah. 1980. An Ethnography of Questioning in the Courtroom. In Language Uses and the Uses of Language, ed. Shuy, R. W. and Shnukal, A., 222–34. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Dindia, Kathryn. 1987. The Effects of Sex of Subject and Sex of Partner on Interruptions. Human Communication Research 13:345–71.Google Scholar
Drew, Paul. 1990. Strategies in the Contest Between Lawyer and Witness in Cross-Examination. In Language in the Judicial Process, ed. Levi, J. N. and Walker, A. G. New York: Plenum Press.Google Scholar
Drew, Paul. 1992. Contested Evidence in Courtroom Cross-Examination: The Case of a Trial for Rape. In Drew and Heritage 1992a.Google Scholar
Drew, Paul, and Heritage, John, eds. 1992a. Analyzing Talk at Work: Interaction in Institutional Settings. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Drew, Paul, and Heritage, John, eds. 1992b. Analyzing Talk at Work: An Introduction. In Drew and Heritage 1992a.Google Scholar
Fisher, Sue. 1984. Institutional Authority and the Structure of Discourse. Discourse Processes 7:201–24.Google Scholar
Freed, Alice F., and Greenwood, Alice. 1996. Women, Men and Type of Talk: What Makes the Difference. Language in Society 25(1): 1–26.Google Scholar
Gal, Susan. 1991. Between Speech and Silence. In Genoer at the Crossroads of Knowledge, ed. Di Leonardo, M. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Gal, Susan. 1995. Language, Gender, and Power: An Anthropological Review. In Hall and Bucholtz 1995.Google Scholar
Gibbons, John, ed. 1994. Language and the Law. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Goffman, Erving. 1967. Interaction Ritual: Essays in Face to Face Behavior. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
Graddol, David, and Swann, Joan. 1989. Gender Voices. Cambridge, England: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Greatbatch, David, and Dingwall, Robert. 1998. Talk and Identity in Divorce Mediation. In Identities in Talk, ed. Antaki, C. and Widdicombe, S. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Grimshaw, Allen D. 1981. Talk and Social Control. In Social Psychology: Sociological Perspectives, ed. Rosenberg, M. and Turner, R. H. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Gumperz, John J., and Cook-Gumperz, Jenny. 1982. Introduction: Language and the Communication of Social Identity. In Language and Social Identity, ed. Gumperz, J. J. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Gunnarsson, Britt-Louise. 1997. Women and Men in the Academic Discourse Community. In Kotthoff and Wodak 1997.Google Scholar
Hall, Kira, and Bucholtz, Mary, eds. 1995. Gender Articulated: Language and the Socially Constructed Self. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Halperin-Kaddari, Ruth. 1997. Implementation of the United Nations Convention on the Elimination of Ali Forms of Discrimination Against Women. Combined Initial and Second Report of the State of Israel. Jerusalem: Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Ministry of Justice.Google Scholar
Harrington, Mona. 1994. Women Lawyers: Rewriting the Rules. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.Google Scholar
Harris, Sandra. 1984. Questions as a Mode of Control in Magistrate's Courts. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 49:5–27.Google Scholar
Harris, Sandra. 1994. Ideological Exchanges in British Magistrates Courts. In Gibbons 1994.Google Scholar
Hilsman, Sally. 1997. Changing Perspectives on Women and the American Criminal Justice System. Paper presented at the Symposium on Women: Crime, Victimization, and Social Control, 21 January, Hebrew University, Jerusalem.Google Scholar
Jack, Dana Crowley, and Jack, Rand. 1994. Women Lawyers: Archetypes and Alternatives. In Mapping the Moral Domain: A Contribution to Women's Thinking, to Psychological theory, and Education, ed. Gilligan, C., Ward, J. V., and Taylor, J. M. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Graduate School of Education.Google Scholar
Jackson, Bernard S. 1995. Making Sense In Law: Linguistic, Psychological, and Semiotic Perspectives. Liverpool, England: Deborah Charles Publications.Google Scholar
Jackson, Bernard S. 1996. Anchored Narratives and the Interface of Law, Psychology and Semiotics. Legal and Criminological Psychology 1:17–45.Google Scholar
James, Deborah, and Ciarke, Sandra. 1993. Women, Men, and Interruptions: A Critical Review. In Tannen 1993.Google Scholar
James, Deborah, and Drakich, Janice. 1993. Understanding Gender Differences in Amount of Talk: A Critical Review of Research. In Tannen 1993.Google Scholar
Johnson, Cathryn. 1994. Gender, Legitimate Authority, and Leader-Subordinate Conversations. American Sociological Review 59:122–35.Google Scholar
Katriel, Tamar. 1986. Talking Straight: “Dugri” Speech in Israeli Sabra Culture. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kennedy, Helena. 1993. Eve Was Framed: Women and British Justice. London: Vintage Books.Google Scholar
Kotthoff, Helga, and Wodak, Ruth, eds. 1997 Communicating Gender in Context. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Lakoff, Robin. 1975. Language and Woman's Place. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
Lane, Chris. 1985. Mis-Communication in Cross-Examinations. In Cross-Cultural En-counters: Communication and Miscommunication, ed. Pride, J. B. Melbourne, Australia: River Seine.Google Scholar
Lerner, Gene H. 1996. Finding “Face” in the Preference Structures of Talk in Interaction. Social Psychology Quarterly 59(4)303–21.Google Scholar
Levi, Judith N., and Graffam Walker, Anne. 1990. Language in the Judicial Process. New York: Plenum Press.Google Scholar
Lutz, Catherine A. 1996. Engendered Emotion: Gender Power and the Rhetoric of Emotional Control In American Discourse. In Language and the Politics of Emotion, ed. Lutz, C. and Abu-Lughod, L. Cambridge and Paris: Cambridge University Press, Editions de la Maise des Sciences de ľ Homme.Google Scholar
MacCorquodale, Patricia. 1996. Gender, Economics, and Opportunity: A Comparison of Attorneys In France and England. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Law and Society Association, Glasgow, Scotland, July 1996.Google Scholar
Maley, Yon. 1994. The Language of the Law. In Gibbons 1994.Google Scholar
Maley, Yon, and Fahey, R. 1991. Presenting the Evidence: Constructions of Reality in Court. International Journal For the Semiotics of Law 4:22–44.Google Scholar
Martin, Sheilah L. 1992. The Dynamics of Exclusion: Women in the Legal Profession. In Gender Equality: A Challenge for the Legal Profession, 1–33. Toronto: Canadian Bar Association.Google Scholar
Martin, Susan Ehrlich, and Nancy, C. Jurik. 1996. Doing justice, Doing Gender: Women in Law and Criminal Justice Occupations. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage.Google Scholar
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court. 1989. Report of the Gender Bias Study of the Supreme Judicial Court. Boston: Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court.Google Scholar
Matoesian, Gregory M. 1993. Reproducing Rape: Domination through Talk in the Courtroom. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Matoesian, Gregory M. 1997. “You were Interested in Him as a Person?” Rhythms of Domination in the Kennedy Smith Rape Trial. Law and Social Inquiry 22(1):55–91.Google Scholar
McBarnet, Doreen. 1981. Magistrates' Courts and the Ideology of Justice. British Journal of Law and Society 8:181–97.Google Scholar
Menkel-Meadow, Carrie. 1985. Portia in a Different Voice: Speculations on a Women's Lawyering Process. Berkeley Women s Law Journal 1:39–63.Google Scholar
Menkel-Meadow, Carrie. 1989. Exploring a Research Agenda of the Feminization of the Legal Profession: Theories of Gender and Social Change. Law and Social Inquiry 14(2):289–319.Google Scholar
Merry, Sally Engle. 1990. Getting Justice and Getting Even. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Mertz, Elizabeth. 1992. Language, Law, and Social Meanings: Linguistic/Anthropological Contributions to the Study of Law. Law and Society Review 26(2):413–45.Google Scholar
Mey, Jacob L. 1985. Whose Language? A Study in Linguistic Pragmatics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Missouri Task Force on Gender and Justice. 1993. Report of the Missouri Task Force on Gender and Justice. Missouri Task Force on Gender and Justice.Google Scholar
Mokros, Harmut B., ed. 1996. Interaction and Identity. New Brunswick, N.J.: Transaction Publishers.Google Scholar
Mulac, Anthony, and James, J. Bradac. 1995. Women's Style in Problem Solving Interaction: Powerless or Simply Feminine. In Gender, Power, and Communication in Human Relations, ed. Kalbfleisch, P. J. and Cody, M. J., 83–104. Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Murray, Stephen. 1987. Power and Solidarity in Interruption: A Critique of the Santa Barbara Conception and Its Application by Orcutt-Harvey (1985). Symbolic Interaction 10:101–10.Google Scholar
Ng, Sik Hung, and James, J. Bradac. 1993. Power in Language: Verbal Communication and Social Influence. Newbury Park, Calif.: Sage.Google Scholar
Ninth Circuit Gender Bias Task Force. 1994. The Effects of Gender in the Federal Courts: The Final Reports of the Ninth Circuit Gender Bias Task Force. Southern California Law Review 67:727–809.Google Scholar
O'Barr, William M. 1982. Linguistic Evidence: Language, Power, and Strategy in the Courtroom. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
O'Barr, William M. 1983. The Study of Language in Institutional Contexts. Journal of Language and Social Psychology 2(2–4):241–51.Google Scholar
Barr, O. William, M., and Bonnie, K. Atkins. 1980. Women's Language or Powerless Language. In Women and Language in Literature and Society, ed. McConnell, S., Borker, R., and Furman, N. New York: Praeger.Google Scholar
Barr, O., William, M., and John, M. Conley. 1988. Lay Expectations of the Civil Justice System. Law and Society Review 22:137–61.Google Scholar
Penman, Robyn. 1987. Discourse In Courts: Cooperation, Coercion, and Coherence. Discourse Processes 10:201–18.Google Scholar
Penman, Robyn. 1990. Facework and Politeness: Multiple Goals in Courtroom Discourse. Journal of Language and Social Psychology 9(1–2):15–38.Google Scholar
Penman, Robyn. 1991. Goals, Games, and Moral Orders: A Paradoxical Case in Court? In Under standing Face-to-Face Interaction: Issues Linking Goals and Discourse, ed. Tracy, K. Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Philips, Susan U. 1990. The Judge as Third Party in American Trial-Court Conflict Talk. In Conflict Talk: Sociolinguistic Investigations of Arguments in Conversations, ed. Grimshaw, A. D. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Pierce, Jennifer L. 1995. Gender Trials: Emotional Lives in Contemporary Law Firms. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Raday, Frances. 1996. Women in Law in Israel: A Study of the Relationship Between Professional Integration and Feminism. Georgia State University Law Review 12:525–52.Google Scholar
Resnik, Judith. 1996. Asking about Gender in Courts. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society 21(4):952–90.Google Scholar
Rhode, Deborah L. 1989. Justice and Gender. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Rhode Island Committee on Women in the Courts. 1987. Final Report of the Rhode Island Committee on Women in the Courts: Final Report on Gender Bias. Rhode Island Committee on Women in the Courts.Google Scholar
Riger, Stephanie, Pennie Foster-Fishman, Julie Nelson-Kuna, and Barbara Curran. 1995. Gender Bias in Courtroom Dynamics. Law and Human Behavior 19(5):465–80.Google Scholar
Rokosz, Denise. N.d. Spycatchers and Leaky Sieves. Department of Linguistics, Edinburgh University.Google Scholar
Romaine, Suzanne. 1997. Gender, Grammar, and the Space in Between. In Kotthoff and Wodak 1997.Google Scholar
Scudder, Joseph N., and Hayes Andrews, Patricia. 1995. A Comparison of Two Alternative Models of Powerful Speech: The Impact of Power and Gender on the Use of Threats. Communication Research Reports 12:25–33.Google Scholar
Seron, Carroll. 1996. The Business of Practicing Law: The Work Lives of Solo and Small-Firm Attorneys. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.Google Scholar
Shotter, John. 1993. Becoming Someone: Identity and Belonging. In Discourse and Lifespan Identity, ed. Coupland, N. and Nussbaum, J. Newbury Park, Calif.: Sage.Google Scholar
Smith, Philip M. 1985. Language, the Sexes, and Society. New York: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Smith-Lovin, Lynn, and Brody, Charles. 1989. Interruptions in Group Discussions: The Effects of Gender and Group Composition. American Sociological Review 54:424–35.Google Scholar
Stepnick, Andrea, and James, D. Orcutt. 1996. Perceptions of Gender Bias in Legal Settings. Sex Roles 34:567–79.Google Scholar
Tamblyn, Katherine, and Wood, David L. 1990. Gender and Justice In the Colorado Courts. Denver: Office of the State Court Administrator.Google Scholar
Tannen, Deborah. 1981. New York Jewish Conversational Style. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 30:133–49.Google Scholar
Tannen, Deborah. 1986. That's Not What I Meant: How Conversational Style Makes or Breaks Your Relations with Others. New York: Ballantine Books.Google Scholar
Tannen, Deborah. 1990. You Just Don't Understand: Women and Men in Conversation. New York: Morrow.Google Scholar
ed. 1993. Gender and Conversational Interaction. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Thorne, Barrie, and Henley, Nancy. 1975. Language and Sex: Difference and Dominance. Rowley, Mass.: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Thorne, Barrie, Kramarae, Cheris, and Henley, Nancy. 1983. Language, Gender, and Society. Rowley, Mass.: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Thornton, Margaret. 1996. Dissonance and Distrust: Women in the Legal Profession. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Todd, Alexandra Dundas, and Fisher, Sue. 1988. Theories of Gender, Theories of Discourse. In Gender and Discourse: The Power of Talk, ed. Todd, A. D. and Fisher, S. Norwood, N.J.: Ablex.Google Scholar
Travers, Max. 1997. The Reality of Law: Work and Talk in a Firm of Criminal Lawyers. Aldershot, U.K.: Ashgate.Google Scholar
Voorhis, Van, Patricia, Joanne Belknap, Welch, Karen, and Stichman, Amy. 1993. Gender Bias in Courts: The Findings and Recommendations of the Task Forces. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Society of Criminology, Phoenix, Arizona, October 1993.Google Scholar
Walker, Ann Graffam. 1988. Linguistic Manipulation, Power, and the Legal Setting. In Power Through Discourse, ed. Kedar, L. Norwood, N.J.: Ablex.Google Scholar
West, Candace. 1984. When the Doctor Is a “Lady”: Power, Status, and Gender in Physician-Patient Encounters. Symbolic Interaction 7:87–106.Google Scholar
West, Candace, and Zimmerman, Don. 1987. Doing Gender. Gender and Society 1(2): 125–51.Google Scholar
Wikler, Norma J. 1987. Educating Judges about Gender Bias in the Courts. In Equality, Justice, and Gender, ed. Mahoney, K. and Martin, S. Toronto: Carswell.Google Scholar
Witz, Anne, and Savage, Mike. 1992. The Gender of Organizations. In Gender and Bureaucracy, ed. Savage, M. and Witz, A. Oxford, U.K.: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Wood, Linda, and Rolf, O. Kroger. 1991. Politeness and Forms of Address. Journal of Language and Social Psychology 10(3):145–68.Google Scholar
Woodbury, Hanni. 1984. The Strategic Use of Questions in Court. Semiotica 48(3/4):197–228.Google Scholar
Worrall, Anne. 1987. Sisters in Law? Women Defendants and Women Magistrates. In Gender Crime and Justice, ed. Carlen, P. and Worrall, A. Milton Keynes, U.K.: Open University.Google Scholar
Yaeger-Dror, Malcah, and Sister, Elaine. 1987. “Scuse Me, Waitaminute”: Directive Use in Israeli Hebrew. Linguistics 25:1127–63.Google Scholar