Investigations of inequality within the courtroom have mostly examined ways in which discourse structure and rules of use constrain witnesses. This article goes beyond interactional practices to deal with four central language ideologies, which both facilitate these practices and impact on the interpretation and understanding of what people say in evidence. The article further shows that language ideologies can have much wider consequences beyond the courtroom. Focusing on language ideologies involved in storytelling and retelling in cross-examination, and using an Australian example, the article traces the recontextualization of part of a witness's story from an initial investigative interview to cross-examination, then to its evaluation in closing arguments and the judicial decision, as well as its (mis)representation in the print media. The analysis reveals the role of these language ideologies in the perpetuation of neocolonial control over Australian Aboriginal people. (Language ideologies, courtroom talk, cross-examination, decontextualization, recontextualization, neocolonial control, Australia)*

agency, bricolage, deconstructionism, demystification, demythologization, difference, discursively constructed subject positions, duality of structure, essentialism, anti-essentialism, hybridity, ideology, intertextuality

What do these terms from the discipline of cultural studies mean? Do they have any relevance to the study of language and identity? If these are questions you have found yourself pondering, then Cultural studies and discourse analysis (CSDA) is a book you should read. This work is a productive collaboration between a cultural studies scholar (Barker) and a critical discourse analyst (Galasinski) who hope to “forge a useful interdisciplinary dialogue” (1). Although their book is written with the specific aim of showing cultural studies (CS) scholars how critical discourse analysis (CDA) can be used as an analytical tool in investigating identities, for sociolinguists it is also a good introduction to the way identity is theorized in CS. The identities analyzed in the data-based chapters are masculinity (chap. 4), ethnicity and nationality (chap. 5), and masculinity together with ethnicity (chap. 6).

Manipulation of language is the key to all participation in the legal system. While linguists, especially sociolinguists, have been researching legal contexts for some two decades, there is still a considerable paucity of research on what happens when second language (L2) and second dialect (D2) speakers come into contact with the ‘language’ of the law. This chapter overviews the current state of theory and research on this topic. As with studies of L1 speakers, most of the studies have analyzed language in courtrooms, where access to data is much easier than in other legal settings, such as police interviews, mediation sessions or lawyer-client interviews. Most such research addresses one or more of the following questions, with the greatest concentration of research on the second and third of these: (a) What are the interpreting needs of second language speakers? (b) How are these needs being addressed? (c) What are the challenges to the provision of language services to second language speakers? And (d) How do dialectal differences affect the participation of second dialect speakers? The discussion concludes by highlighting a number of questions of crucial legal concern that need to be addressed by applied linguistics research.

This study investigates the evidence of Australian Aboriginal witnesses in a New South Wales country courthouse, focusing on how and why witnesses are silenced in examination-in-chief, both by their own lawyer and by the judge. The analysis questions the assumption in previous sociolinguistic research that the syntactic form of questions is inherently related to the way in which power is exercised in court. Further, the article highlights how witness silencing in these cases appears to occur particularly in situations where legal professionals are seriously ignorant about fundamental aspects of the everyday cultural values and practices of Aboriginal people. Sociolinguistic microanalysis gives a glimpse of one aspect of the process by which the powerlessness and domination of Aboriginal people is perpetuated through the legal system.