Individual events within courtroom discourse, such as lawyer-witness interactions have been studied extensively, particularly within a framework of powerful vs. powerless language (Adelsward, 1987; Archer, 2006; Bogoch, 2000; Eades, 2010; Fuller, 1993; Gnisci & Bakeman, 2007; Hobbs, 2007; Keating, 2009; Penman, 1990; Philips, 1984; Roberts, 1990). However, this thesis will show that courtroom discourse is sufficiently unique to warrant a distinct framework. It will also explore the explanatory power of a Courtroom Discourse Verbal Performance framework influenced by Verbal Art as Performance (Bauman, 1977). In particular this work will create a framework (Courtroom Discourse Verbal Performance) that explains the sociolinguistic situation of the entire courtroom trial instead of simply one small part (i.e. questioning a witness, entering a plea, etc.). This framework allows for the inclusion of the whole courtroom discourse event into a single unifying idea of courtroom discourse as performance. The peculiar sociolinguistic interactions of various people within courtroom discourse are explained as restrictions on the interactions of roles within the performance. Courtroom discourse data gathered from the Provo Fourth District Court is presented and analyzed as supporting evidence.

The American courtroom trial is a speech situation. Everything occurs through the spoken word. The 'summation', as speech event embedded within the trial, which is the chronological and psychological culmination of it, is one of the few opportunities for the lawyer to communicate directly with jurors. But the speech genre summation involves preliminaries as well as the event itself; and it can affect the aftermath of the trial, for the decisions of the jurors may be influenced by this discourse.This ethnographic study considers the summation from three perspectives: that of the producer, from the point of view of the ethnographer who observed and analyzed sixty-six actual summations and from that of the receivers of the speech event who must act upon it. Information was obtained from post-deliberation questionnaires completed by 223 jurors, plus 35 alternate jurors.

This volume presents a combination of practical, empirical research data and theoretical reflection to provide a comparative view of language and discourse in the courtroom. The work explores how the various disciplines of law and linguistics can help us understand the nature of "Power and Control" - both oral and written - and how it might be clarified to unravel linguistic representation of legal reality. It presents and examines the most recent research and theories at national and international levels. The book represents a valuable contribution to the study and analysis of courtroom discourse and courtroom cultures more generally. It will be of interest to students and researchers working in the areas of language and law, legal theory, interpretation, and semiotics of law.

With the permission of a North Carolina court, more than 150 hours of courtroom speech were recorded for this study. These tapes provided a rich archive for a variety of different types of inquiry, including the ethnography of courtroom speech and social psychological experiments focused on effects of different modes of presenting information in courts of law. Four sets of linguistic variables and related experimental studies have constituted a major portion of the research: (1) "powerful" versus "powerless" speech; (2) hypercorrect versus formal speech; (3) narrative versus fragmented testimony, and (4) simultaneous speech by witnesses and lawyers. All four sets of studies focus on the central question of importance of form over content of testimony.

This book focuses on historical pragmatics. The author presents the use of reported speech in the Early Modern English records of a state trial of the Elizabethan period. It is worthy of note that the few acquitted defendants were more efficient in the application of manipulative reported speech strategies. The results of qualitative and quantitative analyses confirm that reported speech is a marker of stance.

This book analyzes the complex interplay between gesture, speech and other modal resources (e.g., gaze, facial expression, motion) during the presentation of evidence and interpretation of testimony in court. By analyzing recordings of a well-known rape trial, the authors reveal how multimodal oratory contributes to forensic linguistics and gesture studies, and how it helps understand recent policy recommendations for reforming the rape trial.

The first full study of intensifiers in Late Modern English, combining a range of different theoretical perspectives on courtroom discourse.

Polish vs. American Courtroom Discourse brings together the fields of discourse analysis and socio-legal studies to identify, illustrate and explain the cross-cultural similarities and disparities between the inquisitorial and adversarial procedures of witness examination in criminal trials.

This book examines the rhetoric, discourse, and decision-making within significant Supreme Court cases. Contributing to the fields of communication, law, psychology, and political science, Malphurs considers their potential power and danger and reveals the dynamic nature of the justices' interactions among themselves and the advocates.

Sociolinguists and lawyers will find insight and relevance in this account of the language of the courtroom, as exemplified in the criminal trial of O.J. Simpson. The trial is examined as the site of linguistic power and persuasion, focusing on the role of language in (re)presenting and (re)constructing the crime. In addition to the trial transcripts, the book draws on Simpson's post-arrest interview, media reports and post-trial interviews with jurors. The result is a unique multi-dimensional insight into the 'Trial of the Century' from a linguistic and discursive perspective.