Language-and-law research is now an established field for study, with decades of development behind it. And yet the field remains fragmented, with disparate streams of scholarship that, ironically, tend to speak in different languages: linguistic anthropology, discourse studies, semiotics, literary theory and rhetoric, translation studies, sociolinguistics, legal philosophy, and more. On one hand, this broad variety speaks to the robust character of language-and-law studies as a focus for relatively diverse scholarly endeavors. And for a number of reasons, it seems likely that the separate schools of thought in this area will generally continue to pursue their often distinct paths. On the other hand, as this article argues, a careful reading of work in the area reveals the potential for a productive conversation among some very different perspectives. Such a conversation offers the promise of creating exciting bridges among law, the social sciences, and the humanities. It also draws together interest in a variety of kinds of language: spoken, gestural, written, visual. This kind of bridge, we suggest, is one of the gifts of the truly interdisciplinary space opened up by sociolegal research—it permits us to combine quite diverse kinds of knowledge in our quest to more fully understand closely related legal phenomena. In this article, we also combine two different kinds of disciplinary voices, inviting the reader to assess what insights about law arise from these voices separately and, perhaps, together.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


Literature Cited

  1. Abel R. 2007. Contesting legality in the United States after September 11. Fighting for Political Liberalism T Halliday, L Karpik, M Feeley 361–402 Oxford, UK/Portland, OR: Hart [Google Scholar]
  2. Adelman H. 2007. Canada's balancing act: protecting human rights and countering terrorist threats. See Brysk & Shafir 2007 137–56
  3. Amaya H. 2007. Latino immigrants in the American discourses of citizenship and nationalism during the Iraqi war. Crit. Discourse Stud. 4:237–56 [Google Scholar]
  4. Atkinson JM, Drew P. 1979. Order in Court: The Organization of Verbal Interaction in Judicial Settings Atlantic Highlands, NJ: Humanit. Press
  5. Austin JL. 1962. How to Do Things with Words Oxford, UK: Clarendon
  6. Baylis EA. 2006. The inevitable impunity of suicide terrorists. See Parry 2006a 111–26
  7. Ben-Porath S. 2006. Citizenship Under Fire: Democratic Education in Times of Conflict. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
  8. Ben-Porath S, Smith RM. 2013. Varieties of Sovereignty and Citizenship Philadelphia: Univ. Pa. Press
  9. Bentham J. 1970 (1782). Of Laws in General HLA Hart London: Athlone
  10. Berk-Seligson S. 2009. Coerced Confessions: The Discourse of Bilingual Police Interrogations Berlin: Mouton DeGruyter
  11. Biggio FA. 2002. Neutralizing the threat: reconsidering existing doctrines in the emerging war on terrorism. Case West. Reserv. J. Int. Law 34:1–43 [Google Scholar]
  12. Bowring B. 2002. The degradation of international law?. See Strawson 2002 3–19
  13. Brysk A. 2007. Human rights and national insecurity. See Brysk & Shafir 2007 1–13
  14. Brysk A, Shafir G. 2007. National Insecurity and Human Rights: Democracies Debate Counterterrorism Berkeley: Univ. Calif. Press
  15. Carty A. 2002. The terrors of freedom: the sovereignty of states and the freedom to fear. See Strawson 2002 44–58
  16. Chandrasekhar C. 2003. Flying while brown: federal civil rights remedies to post-9/11 airline racial profiling of South Asians. Asian Am. Law J. 10:215–52 [Google Scholar]
  17. Conley J. 2006. Power is as power does. Law Soc. Inq. 31:467–75 [Google Scholar]
  18. Conley J, O'Barr W. 2005. Just Words: Law, Language and Power Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press, 2nd ed..
  19. Constable M. 2005. Just Silences: The Limits and Possibilities of Modern Law Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
  20. Constable M. 2011. Law as claim to justice: legal history and legal speech acts. UC Irvine Law Rev. 1:631–40 [Google Scholar]
  21. Cover R. 1992 (1983). Narrative, Violence and the Law: The Essays of Robert Cover M Minnow, M Ryan, A Sarat Ann Arbor: Univ. Mich. Press
  22. Danet B. 1980. Language in the legal process. Law Soc. Rev. 14:3445–564 [Google Scholar]
  23. Darian-Smith E. 2013. Laws and Societies in Global Contexts New York: Cambridge Univ. Press
  24. Davies M. 2002. Asking the Law Question Sydney: Lawbook, 2nd ed..
  25. Disha I, Cavendish JC, King RD. 2011. Historical events and spaces of hate: hate crimes against Arabs and Muslims in post-9/11 America. Soc. Probl. 58:121–46 [Google Scholar]
  26. Duffy MT. 2012. Turning the kaleidoscope: fractured narratives and altered presumptions in anti-terrorism detention practices PhD Thesis, McGill Univ., Montreal
  27. Dworkin R. 1986. Law's Empire Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press
  28. Eades D. 2010. Sociolinguistics and the Legal Process Bristol, UK: Multiling. Matters
  29. Endicott T. 2010. Language and law. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy E Zalta Stanford, CA: Stanford Univ http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2010/entries/law-language/ [Google Scholar]
  30. Ewick P, Silbey S. 1998. The Common Place of Law: Stories from Everyday Life Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
  31. Fairclough N. 1989. Language and Power London: Longman
  32. Fitzpatrick P. 1992. The Mythology of Modern Law London: Routledge
  33. Fitzpatrick P. 2001. Modernism and the Grounds of Law Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
  34. Goodrich P. 1991. Eating law: commons, common land, common law. J. Leg. Hist. 12:3246–67 [Google Scholar]
  35. Goodrich P. 2011. Specters of law: why the history of the legal spectacle has not been written. UC Irvine Law Rev. 1:773–812 [Google Scholar]
  36. Gould JB, Barclay S. 2012. Mind the gap: the place of gap studies in sociolegal scholarship. Annu. Rev. Law Soc. Sci. 8:323–35 [Google Scholar]
  37. Greenhouse CJ. 2006. Fieldwork on law. Annu. Rev. Law Soc. Sci. 2:187–210 [Google Scholar]
  38. Greenhouse CJ. 2011. The Paradox of Relevance: Ethnography and Citizenship in the United States Philadelphia: Univ. Pa. Press
  39. Grice HP. 1975. Logic and conversation. Syntax and Semantics P Cole 41–58 New York: Academic [Google Scholar]
  40. Gruber C. 2014. I'm Sorry for What I've Done: The Language of Courtroom Apologies Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press
  41. Hage G. 2003. Against Paranoid Nationalism Sydney: Pluto
  42. Hage G. 2005. Warring societies/phallic democracies. Arena Mag. 75:26–32 [Google Scholar]
  43. Hajjar L. 2013. Torture: A Sociology of Violence and Human Rights New York: Routledge
  44. Hart HLA. 1994. The Concept of Law Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press, 2nd ed..
  45. Heinz W. 2007. Germany: state responses to terrorist challenges and human rights. See Brysk & Shafir 2007 157–76
  46. Hirsch S. 1998. Pronouncing and Persevering: Coast Kenyan Courts Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
  47. Holder E. 2012. Attorney General Eric Holder Speaks at Northwestern University Law School Washington, DC: US Dep. Justice http://www.justice.gov/iso/opa/ag/speeches/2012/ag-speech-1203051.html
  48. Honig B. 2009. Emergency Politics: Paradox, Law, Democracy Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
  49. Jackson R. 2005. Writing the War on Terrorism: Language, Politics, and Counter-terrorism Manchester, UK: Univ. Manchester Press
  50. Journell W. 2011. The challenges of political instruction in a post-9/11 United States. High Sch. J. 95:3–14 [Google Scholar]
  51. Lacey N. 1996. Normative reconstruction in socio-legal theory. Soc. Leg. Stud. 5:2130–40 [Google Scholar]
  52. Lavi S. 2011. Turning the tables on “law and…”: a jurisprudential inquiry into contemporary legal theory. Cornell Law Rev. 96:811–38 [Google Scholar]
  53. Lokaneeta J. 2011. Transnational Torture: Law, Violence, and State Power in the US and India New York: NYU Press
  54. Luban D. 2002. The war on terrorism and the end of human rights. Philos. Public Policy Q. 22:39–14 [Google Scholar]
  55. Luban D. 2007. Legal Ethics and Human Dignity New York: Cambridge Univ. Press
  56. Luban D. 2010. Carl Schmitt and the critique of lawfare. Case West. Reserv. J. Int. Law 43:457–71 [Google Scholar]
  57. Mamdani M. 2005. Good Muslim, Bad Muslim: America, the Cold War, and the Roots of Terror New York: Doubleday
  58. Margulies J. 2006. Guantanamo and the Abuse of Presidential Power New York: Simon & Schuster
  59. Margulies J. 2013. What Changed When Everything Changed: 9/11 and the Making of National Identity New Haven, CT: Yale Univ. Press
  60. Marti S, Domingo P, Ibarra P. 2007. Democracy, civil liberties, and counterterrorist measures in Spain. See Brysk & Shafir 2007 118–36
  61. Matoesian G. 1993. Reproducing Rape: Domination Through Talk in the Courtroom. Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
  62. Matoesian G. 2001. Law and the Language of Identity: Discourse in the William Kennedy Smith Rape Trial. Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press
  63. Mawani R. 2012. Law's archive. Annu. Rev. Law Soc. Sci. 8:337–65 [Google Scholar]
  64. Maynard D. 1984. Inside Plea Bargaining New York: Plenum
  65. McCann M. 1994. Rights at Work: Pay Equity Reform and the Politics of Legal Mobilization Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
  66. Megret F. 2013. The humanitarian problem with drones. Work. Pap., McGill Univ., Montreal. http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2228659
  67. Meltzer D. 2002. Al Qa'ida: terrorists or irregulars. See Strawson 2002 71–89
  68. Mertz E. 2002. The perfidy of gaze and the pain of uncertainty: anthropological theory and the search for closure. Ethnography in Unstable Places: Everyday Lives in Contexts of Dramatic Political Change C Greenhouse, E Mertz, K Warren 355–78 Durham, NC: Duke Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  69. Mertz E. 2007. The Language of Law School: Learning to “Think Like a Lawyer.” Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press
  70. Miller D. 2006. The politics of metaphor. Theory Cult. Soc. 23:63–65 [Google Scholar]
  71. Moore SF. 1978. Law as Process London: Routledge & Kegan Paul
  72. Ng K. 2010. The Common Law in Two Voices: Language, Law, and the Postcolonial Dilemma in Hong Kong Stanford, CA: Stanford Univ. Press
  73. Ochs E. 1994. Stories that step into the future. Perspectives on Register: Situating Register Variation Within Sociolinguistics D Biber 106–35 Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  74. Orren K. 1992. Metaphysics and reality in late nineteenth-century labor adjudication. Labor Law in America: Historical and Critical Essays C Tomlins, A King 160–79 Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins Press [Google Scholar]
  75. Parry JT. 2006a. Evil, Law and the State: Perspectives on State Power and Violence Amsterdam: Rodopi
  76. Parry JT. 2006b. Pain, interrogation, and the body: state violence and the law of torture. See Parry 2006a 1–16
  77. Philips S. 1998. Ideology in the Language of Judges: How Judges Practice Law, Politics and Courtroom Control New York: Oxford Univ. Press
  78. Pound R. 1910. Law in books and law in action. Am. Law Rev. 44:12–36 [Google Scholar]
  79. Rabkin J. 2013. If you need a friend, don't call a cosmopolitan. Varieties of Sovereignty and Citizenship S Ben-Porath, R Smith 166–88 Philadelphia: Univ. Pa. Press [Google Scholar]
  80. Rajah J. 2011. Punishing bodies, securing the nation: how rule of law can legitimate the urbane authoritarian state. Law Soc. Inq. 36:945–70 [Google Scholar]
  81. Rajah J. 2012. Authoritarian Rule of Law: Legislation, Discourse and Legitimacy in Singapore New York: Cambridge Univ. Press
  82. Rajah J. 2014. Transnational legal ordering through ‘rule of law’ discourse. Transnational Legal Orders T Halliday, G Shaffer New York: Cambridge Univ. Press. In press [Google Scholar]
  83. Richland J. 2008. Arguing with Tradition: The Language of Law in Hopi Tribal Court Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
  84. Rimmon-Kenan S. 1989. Narrative Fiction: Contemporary Poetics London: Methuen
  85. Saft S, Ohara Y. 2006. The media and the pursuit of militarism in Japan: newspaper editorials in the aftermath of 9/11. Crit. Discourse Stud. 3:81–101 [Google Scholar]
  86. Santos BdS. 2007. Beyond abyssal thinking: from global lines to ecologies of knowledge. Review (Fernand Braudel Cent.) 30:45–89 [Google Scholar]
  87. Santos BdS, Rodríguez-Garavito CA. 2005. Law and Globalization from Below: Towards a Cosmopolitan Legality New York: Cambridge Univ. Press
  88. Sarat A. 2005. Editorial. Law Cult. Humanit. 1:1 [Google Scholar]
  89. Sassen S. 2008. Neither global nor national: novel assemblages of territory, authority and rights. Ethics Glob. Polit. 1:61–79 [Google Scholar]
  90. Schauer F. 2011. Positivism before Hart. Can. J. Law Jurisprud. 24:455–71 [Google Scholar]
  91. Schmitt C. 2007 (1932). The Concept of the Political Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
  92. Shafir G. 2007. Torturing democracies: the curious debate over the “Israeli model.”. See Brysk & Shafir 2007 92–117
  93. Shuy R. 2005. Creating Language Crimes: How Law Enforcement Uses (and Misuses) Language Oxford, UK: Blackwell [Google Scholar]
  94. Silverstein M. 1979. Language structure and linguistic ideology. The Elements: A Parasession on Linguistic Units and Levels P Clyne, W Hanks, C Hofbauer 193–247 Chicago: Chicago Linguist. Soc. [Google Scholar]
  95. Simone M. 2009. Give me liberty and give me surveillance: a case study of the US government's discourse of surveillance. Crit. Discourse Stud. 6:1–14 [Google Scholar]
  96. Solan L. 2010. The Language of Statutes: Laws and Their Interpretation Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
  97. Spence K. 2005. World risk society and war against terror. Polit. Stud. 53:284–302 [Google Scholar]
  98. Strawson J. 2002. Law After Ground Zero London: Glasshouse
  99. Sullivan J, Hendriks H. 2009. Public support for civil liberties pre- and post-9/11. Annu. Rev. Law Soc. Sci. 5:375–91 [Google Scholar]
  100. Sylvester DJ. 2006. The lessons of Nuremberg and the trial of Saddam Hussein. See Parry 2006a 127–42
  101. Tiersma P. 2008. What is language and law? And does anyone care?. Language and Law: Theory and Society F Olsen, A Lorz, D Stein 9–34 Düsseldorf, Ger.: Düsseldorf Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  102. Tiersma P, Solan L. 2012. The Oxford Handbook of Language and Law Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press
  103. Tomlins C, Comaroff J. 2011. “Law as …”: theory and practice in legal history. UC Irvine Law Rev. 1:1039–79 [Google Scholar]
  104. Travers M. 2006. Understanding talk in legal settings: what law and society studies can learn from a conversation analyst. Law Soc. Inq. 31:447–65 [Google Scholar]
  105. Trinch S. 2003. Latinas' Narratives of Domestic Abuse: Discrepant Versions of Violence Amsterdam: John Benjamins
  106. Valverde M. 1999. Derrida's justice and Foucault's freedom: ethics, history, and social movements. Law Soc. Inq. 24:655–76 [Google Scholar]
  107. Van Dijk T. 1993. Elite Discourse and Racism Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
  108. Volpp L. 2003. The citizen and the terrorist. September 11 in History: A Watershed Moment? ML Dudziak 147–62 Durham, NC: Duke Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  109. Volpp L. 2007. Citizenship undone. Fordham Law Rev. 75:2579–86 [Google Scholar]
  110. Waldron J. 1994. Vagueness in language and law: some philosophical issues. Calif. Law Rev. 82:509–40 [Google Scholar]
  111. Waldron J. 2010. Torture, Terror, and Trade-Offs: Philosophy for the White House New York: Oxford Univ. Press
  112. Ward I. 2009. Law, Text, Terror Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
  113. Weissbourd B, Mertz E. 1985. Rule-centrism versus legal creativity: the skewing of legal ideology through language. Law Soc. Rev. 19:623–60 [Google Scholar]
  114. White JB. 1973. The Legal Imagination Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
  115. White JB. 1984. When Words Lose Their Meaning: Constitutions and Reconstitutions of Language Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
  116. White JB. 1990. Justice as Translation Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
  117. Yoo J. 2005. The Powers of War and Peace: The Constitution and Foreign Affairs After 9/11 Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
  118. Yoo J. 2006. War by Other Means: An Insider's Account of the War on Terror New York: Atl. Mon.
  • Article Type: Review Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error