Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T21:32:50.476Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Procedures without borders: The language-ideological anchorage of legal-administrative procedures in translocal institutional settings

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 January 2013

Katrijn Maryns
Katrijn Maryns*
Affiliation:
FWO Research Foundation Flanders - Ghent University Kallobaan 43, 9120 Beveren, [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Theoretical and applied research in the field of institutional discourse analysis calls for an increasing awareness of the constitutive nature of discourse in the representation and the assessment of social identities (Sarangi & Roberts 1999; Blommaert 2010; Eades 2010). The staunchly textualist accounts surviving institutional practice, however, tend to obscure complex multidiscursive and language ideologically anchored processes that mold procedural outcomes. On the basis of first-hand ethnographic data collected across legal-administrative procedures in Belgium, this article aims at revealing some meaningful contexts that have been erased in the case of an asylum seeker who became a murder victim and whose asylum file was used in the assize trial as a resource to sketch his social identity. The analysis explores the ideological functioning of textuality in the situated details of communicative practice, thereby aiming for a better understanding of the intricacies of multidiscursive identity construction in translocal procedural settings. (Institutional discourse analysis, multidiscursivity, language ideology and identity, sociolinguistic mobility, asylum procedure, assize court procedure)*

Type
Articles
Information
Language in Society , Volume 42 , Issue 1 , February 2013 , pp. 71 - 92
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2013

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

Barsky, Robert (1994). Constructing a productive other: Discourse theory and the convention refugee hearing. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Blommaert, Jan (2009). Language, asylum and the national order. Current Anthropology 50(4):415–41.Google Scholar
Blommaert, Jan (2010). The sociolinguistics of globalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar
Briggs, Charles (1997). Notes on a “confession”: On the construction of gender, sexuality, and violence in an infanticide case. Pragmatics 7(4):519–46.Google Scholar
Bucholz, Mary (2000). The politics of transcription. Journal of Pragmatics 32:1439–65.Google Scholar
Collins, James (1996). Socialization to text: Structure and contradiction in schooled literacy. In Silverstein, Michael & Urban, Greg (eds.), Natural histories of discourse, 203–28. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Conley, John, & O'Barr, William (1990). Rules versus relationships: The ethnography of legal discourse. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Cotterill, Janet (2002). Language in the legal process. London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Coulthard, Malcolm, & Johnson, Alison (2010). The Routledge handbook of forensic linguistics. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Declercq, Raoul (2007). Beginselen van strafrechtspleging. Mechelen: Kluwer.Google Scholar
D'hondt, Sigurd (2009). Others on trial: The construction of cultural otherness in Belgian first instance criminal hearings. Journal of Pragmatics 41(4):806–28.Google Scholar
Drew, Paul, & Heritage, John (eds.) (1992). Talk at work: Interaction in institutional settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Duranti, Alessandro (ed.) (2004). A companion to linguistic anthropology. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Eades, Diana (2010). Sociolinguistics and the legal process. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Ehrlich, Susan (2001). Representing rape: Language and sexual consent. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Gibbons, John (2003). Forensic linguistics: An introduction to language in the justice system. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Goffman, Erving (1981). Forms of talk. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Haviland, John (2003). Ideologies of language: Reflections on language and US law. American Anthropologist 105:764–74.Google Scholar
Heydon, Georgina (2005). The language of police interviewing: A critical analysis. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Horder, Jeremy (2005). Reshaping the subjective element in the provocation defence. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 25(1):123–40.Google Scholar
Inghilleri, Moira (2007). National sovereignty versus universal rights: Interpreting justice in a global context. Social Semiotics 17(2):195–212.Google Scholar
Jacquemet, Marco (2005). Transidiomatic practices: Language and power in the age of globalization. Language and Communication 25(3):257–77.Google Scholar
Jacquemet, Marco (2009). Transcribing refugees: The entextualization of asylum-seekers’ hearings in a transidiomatic environment. Text and Talk 29(5):525–46.Google Scholar
Jacquemet, Marco (2011). Crosstalk 2.0.: Asylum and communicative breakdowns. Text & Talk 31(4):475–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Komter, Martha (2002). The suspect's own words: The treatment of written statements in Dutch courtrooms. The International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law 9(2):168–92.Google Scholar
Maiani, Francesco (2010). The concept of “persecution” in refugee law: Indeterminacy, context-sensitivity, and the quest for a principled approach. Les Dossiers du Grihl Online: http://dossiersgrihl.revues.org/3896.Google Scholar
Maryns, Katrijn (2006). The asylum speaker: Language in the Belgian asylum procedure. Manchester: St. Jerome.Google Scholar
Maryns, Katrijn (2012). Multilingualism in legal settings. In Martin-Jones, Marilyn, Blackledge, Adrian, & Creese, Angela (eds.), Routledge handbook of multilingualism, 297–313. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Matoesian, Greg (1999). Intertextuality, affect, and ideology in legal discourse. Text 19(1):73–109.Google Scholar
Matoesian, Greg (2001). Law and the language of identity: Discourse in the William Kennedy Smith rape trial. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
McKinnon, Sara L. (2009). Citizenship and the performance of credibility: Audiencing gender-based asylum seekers in U.S. immigration courts. Text and Performance Quarterly 29(3):205–21.Google Scholar
Mertz, Elizabeth (1994). Legal language: Pragmatics, poetics, and social power. Annual Review of Anthropology 23:435–55.Google Scholar
Pavlenko, Aneta, & Blackledge, Adrian (2004). Negotiation of identities in multilingual contexts. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Pennycook, Alastair (2010). Language as local practice. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pöllabauer, Sonja (2004). Interpreting in asylum hearings: Issues of role, responsibility and power. Interpreting 6(2):143–80.Google Scholar
Rampton, Ben (2006). Language in late Modernity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sarangi, Srikant, & Slembrouck, Stef (1996). Language, bureaucracy and social control. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Sarangi, Srikant, & Roberts, Celia (eds.) (1999). Talk, work and institutional order: Discourse in medical, mediation and management settings. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Silverstein, Michael, & Urban, Greg (eds.) (1996). Natural histories of discourse. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Sing, James (1999). Culture as sameness: Toward a synthetic view of provocation and culture in the criminal law. Yale Law Journal 108:1845–84.Google Scholar
Solan, Lawrence (1995). Judicial decisions and linguistic analysis: Is there a linguist in the court? Washington University Law Journal 73(3):1069–83.Google Scholar
Sullivan, Robert (1992). Intent, subjective recklessness and culpability. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 12(3):380–91.Google Scholar
Tipton, Rebecca (2008). Reflexivity and the social construction of identity in interpreter-mediated asylum interviews. The Translator 14(1):1–19.Google Scholar
Traest, Philip (2001). The jury in Belgium. Revue Internationale de droit pénal 72:27–50.Google Scholar