Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Theorising language in sociolinguistics and the law: (How) can sociolinguistics have an impact on inequality in the criminal justice process?

  • Diana Eades

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapterResearchpeer-review

Abstract

A common complaint about the legal system is that lawyers can manipulate people with complex language, such as "big words" and "tricky questions". But sociolinguistic research, beginning in the early 1980s and examining a number of legal contexts, demonstrates many more ways in which language is implicated in the widespread popular dissatisfaction with the law, For example, research in criminal courts shows how defendants and witnesses are controlled, coerced, and manipulated through the rigid and asymmetrical discourse structure of courtroom hearings, which restricts the interactional rights of witnesses to providing answers to specific questions (see Eades 2010 for references). More recently, considerable sociolinguistic attention has turned to how competing stories can, or must, be told, retold, and evaluated throughout the criminal justice process. This chapter examines a theoretical dissonance between how sociolinguistics and the law see language, which is highlighted in this research.
Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationSociolinguistics: Theoretical Debates
EditorsNikolas Coupland
Place of PublicationCambridge, United Kingdom
PublisherCambridge University Press
Pages367-388
Edition1
ISBN (Print)9781107062283, 9781107635753
Publication statusPublished - 2016

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

  1. SDG 16 - Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions
    SDG 16 Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

Keywords

  • Language in Culture and Society (Sociolinguistics)
  • Law and Society

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Theorising language in sociolinguistics and the law: (How) can sociolinguistics have an impact on inequality in the criminal justice process?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this