The impact of court interpreting on the coerciveness of leading questions

Speech, Language and the Law

Volumn 6, Issue 1, 1999, Pages 30-56

  Berk Seligson, Susan ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH   (United States)

Author keywords

Coercion; Court interpreting; Leading questions; Spanish

Indexed keywords

EID: 54249128879     PISSN: 13501771     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1558/sll.1999.6.1.30     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Aron, R., Duffy, K. T., and Rosner, J. L. (1989) Cross-Examination of Witnesses: The Litigator's Puzzle, Colorado Springs, Colorado: McGraw-Hill Information Services Company.
2. Atkinson, M. and Drew, P. (1979) Order in Court: The Organization of Verbal Behavior in Judicial Settings, London: Macmillan.
3. Berk-Seligson, S. (1987) 'The intersection of testimony styles in interpreted judicial proceedings: pragmatic alterations in Spanish testimony', Linguistics, 25: 1087-125.
4. Berk-Seligson, S. (1988) 'The impact of politeness in witness testimony', Multilingua, 7(4): 411-39.
5. Berk-Seligson, S. (1989) 'The role of register in the bilingual courtroom: evaluative reactions to interpreted testimony', in I. Wherritt and O. Garcia (eds), US Spanish: The Language of Latinos, special issue of the International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 79(5): 79-91.
6. Berk-Seligson, S. (1990a) The Bilingual Courtroom: Court Interpreters in the Judicial Process, Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
7. Berk-Seligson, S. (1990b) 'Bilingual court proceedings: the role of the court interpreter', in J. L. Levi and A. G. Walker (eds), Language in the Judicial Process, New York: Plenum, 155-202.
8. Bresnahan, M. I. (1979) 'Linguistic limbo: the case of the non-native English-speaking defendant in the American courtroom', paper presented at the Ninth Annual Colloquium on New Ways of Analyzing English, Montreal.
9. Churchill, L. (1978) Questioning Strategies in Sociolinguistics, Rowley, Mass: Newbury House.
10. Danet, B. and Kermish, N. C. (1978) 'Courtroom questioning: a sociolinguistic perspective', in L. N. Massery II (ed.), Psychology and Persuasion in Advocacy, Washington, D.C.: Association of Trial Lawyers of America, National College of Advocacy.
11. Danet, B. and Bogoch, B. (1980) 'Fixed fight or free-for-all? An empirical study of combativeness in the adversary system of justice', British Journal of Law and Society, 7(1): 36-60.
12. Dunstan, R. (1980) 'Context for coercion: Analyzing properties of courtroom "questions"', British Journal of Law and Society 7(1): 60-77.
13. Ehrhardt, C. W. and Young, S. J. (1995) 'Using leading questions during direct examination', Florida State University Law Review, 23(2): 401-16.
14. Federal Rules of Evidence 611(c).
15. Goody, E. N. (1978) 'Towards a theory of questions', in E. N. Goody (ed.), Questions and Politeness, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
16. Jeans, J. W. (1993) Trial Advocacy (2nd edn), St. Paul, Minnesota: West Publishing Company.
17. Keeton, R. E. 1973. Trial Tactics and Methods, Boston: Little, Brown and Company.
18. Mauet, T. A. (1996) Trial Techniques (4th edn), Boston: Little, Brown and Company.
19. McElhaney, J. W. (1989) 'Leading questions', ABA Journal, 75: 104.
20. Morris, B. G. (1967) 'The Sixth Amendment's right of confrontation and the non-English speaking accused', Florida Bar Journal, 41(7): 475-82.
21. Ogle, R., Parkman, A., and Porter, J. (1980) 'Questions: leading and otherwise: a framework for judicial discretion', Judges' Journal, 19(3): 42-5.
22. Packel, L. and Spina, D. B. (1984) Trial Advocacy: A Systematic Approach, Philadelphia: American Law Institute - American Bar Association Committee on Continuing Professional Education.
23. Pietrafesa, G. (1994) 'Where you can use your leading questions', New Jersey Law Journal, 137(11): 10 and 29.
24. Porcel, J. (1998) Personal communication.
25. Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. A. and Jefferson, G. (1974) 'A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation', Language, 50(4): 696-735.
26. Schegloff, E. (1972) 'Sequencing in conversational openings', in J. J. Gumperz and D. Hymes (eds), Directions in Sociolinguistics, New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 346-80.
27. Walker, A. G. (1987) 'Linguistic manipulation, power and the legal setting', in L. Kedar (ed.) Power through Discourse, Norwood, New Jersey: Ablex, 57-82.
28. Wigmore, J. H. (1942) A Treatise on the Anglo-American System of Evidence in Trials at Common Law: Including the Statutes and Judicial Decisions of all Jurisdictions of the United States and Canada (3rd edn), Boston: Little, Brown and Company.
29. Woodbury, H. (1984) 'The strategic use of questions in court', Semiotica, 48(3/4): 197-228.