Courtroom Language Skills

Author: Liao Meizhen
Publisher:
Publish Date: 2005-08-01
Features: This book discusses "courtroom language skills," but it is more about real legal and jurisprudence issues. It pioneers judicial empirical research, demonstrating a perfect integration of linguistics and legal (law) studies. Professor Shu Guoying, doctoral supervisor at China University of Political Science and Law, is faithful, authentic, vivid, convincing, and admirable. It is an outstanding work on legal linguistics, jurisprudence, and legal practice by the author, following his previous book "Legal Q&A and Its Interactive Research." It reveals courtroom language issues and provides solutions to these problems. Any judge, prosecutor, lawyer, law student—or even anyone else engaged in legal work—cannot afford to miss this book. Mr. Tian Wenchang, a renowned lawyer and lifetime honorary member of the American Bar Association, states that this book helps fill two important gaps in our knowledge: first, the relationship between non-common law legal systems and language; second, how other languages are used in court besides English. The book also explores many other legal language issues, such as the "legal jargon" problem and the "plain language" problem, making it an indispensable read for those engaged in rapidly developing legal linguistics research in China. Mr. Joho Gibbons, President of the International Association of Legal Linguistics
Dear readers, before discussing courtroom language skills, let me briefly address a few questions as a "warm-up exercise" to help you better understand the content and purpose of this book.
1. Is language important to law? What is the relationship between language and law? To answer this question, let us hear what some world-renowned scholars have said: Peter M. Tiersma, Vice President of the International Association of Legal Linguistics and a professor of law in the United States, in his book "Legal Language" (1999), remarks: "Few professions rely on language as much as law." He believes, "law is the law of words," and "moral and customs may be embedded in human behavior, but law arises through language." William M. O’Baar, a famous anthropologist and legal linguistics scholar, in his book "Just Words" (1998), co-authored with John M. Conley, a law professor at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, states: "In both written and spoken form, law is language." A. Kaufmann and N. MacKenzie simply say: "Jurisprudence is, in fact, a form of legal linguistics." It is clear that law cannot do without language: legislation cannot do without language—every law and regulation must be expressed in words; judicial trials cannot do without language—direct testimony is the principle of judicial trials; law enforcement and judicial mediation also depend on language; and legal research is even more dependent on language. Many legal issues are, in fact, language issues. Therefore, to study law, one must study language; to follow the law, one must master language; to research law, one must study language; and to research legal issues, one must study the language of law.
2. What is the relationship between linguistics and legal linguistics? Linguistics is the study of language patterns, while law is the study of laws. What is the connection between the two? Before answering this question, let me share a related experience. In July 2003, I was invited to attend the 6th International Conference of the International Association of Legal Linguistics held at the University of Sydney in Australia, where I met almost all the world-renowned legal linguists, lawyers, and judges. During our conversations, I found that many lawyers and judges had a solid background in linguistics, and many had studied linguistics before pursuing law. Moreover, this approach has become a consensus among law students in some Western countries. For example, Lawrence M. Solan, the previous president of the International Association of Legal Linguistics, once wrote about an incident in his book: In the late 1970s, he decided to study law and prepare to become a lawyer. Before entering law school, he consulted some well-known practicing lawyers. To his surprise, many of them gave him the same advice: "Law is largely a linguistic issue, and the transition from linguistic thinking to legal thinking should be very natural." Moreover, for lawyers, having a linguistic background gives them an advantage (Solan, 1993). Solan followed this advice, first studying linguistics before pursuing law. Later, he wrote a book ("The Language of Judges"), in which his analysis and critique of judicial language—especially the language used to interpret laws—were brilliant and convincing. He was later elected as the third president of the International Association of Legal Linguistics by renowned British linguist Malcolm Coulthard, a founding president of the association, and has become one of the leading figures in international legal linguistics research today. Solan’s example fully illustrates the importance of linguistics for those engaged in legal work. In my extensive experience of observing court trials, I have found that Chinese judges, prosecutors, and lawyers often have language issues—at least those worth discussing. In fact, some observant, diligent, and eager-to-learn lawyers, prosecutors, and judges have also noticed these problems. But unfortunately, many people understand the "what" but not the "why." In reality, many courtroom techniques are the application and development of linguistic knowledge. Therefore, if judges, prosecutors, and lawyers have some knowledge of linguistics and a certain theoretical foundation in linguistics, they can completely avoid these problems in court. Thus, linguistic knowledge is indispensable for those in the legal profession. Some law schools or departments of law in Chinese universities do not even offer courses in linguistics, as if linguistics has nothing to do with law or legal studies. Some do offer such courses, but they are very superficial and merely decorative. There are almost no courses that truly integrate linguistic theory—especially advanced, influential theories in the contemporary era that have been proven effective—with law and legal language for analysis. This is truly a regrettable situation.
3. Language skills and roles
This book is about language skills, specifically about courtroom language skills. So, are language skills the same for all industries and all people? The answer is: skills vary with roles, and roles are determined by purpose. Purpose can be institutional or specific to individual actions. The establishment of people’s courts, procuratorates, and law firms, as well as the creation of the professions of judges, prosecutors, and lawyers, are all for certain purposes. The purpose of a prosecutor is "to accuse," while the purpose of a lawyer is "to defend." Different purposes determine different roles in court, and different roles inevitably lead to different language and language strategies. Therefore, we discuss the language of judges, prosecutors, and lawyers separately. However, they all use the same language—Chinese—and their purpose is persuasion. Thus, some language issues and language skills share common patterns. At the same time, courtroom language is used in interaction, so only by fully understanding the language skills of the other party can one better use language skills to persuade them.
4. What to say and how to say it
Legal language includes two levels: language content and language form. In simple terms, it is "what to say" and "how to say it." Philosophers have already made countless insightful remarks on the issue of form and content, so I need not elaborate on it here. There is a popular saying: "It’s not what you say, but how you say it." We believe that both "what to say" and "how to say it" are important, meaning that form and content are equally important. However, for a law student in university, after four years of study, they may have learned what judges, prosecutors, and lawyers should say, but they may not have learned how to say it effectively. Therefore, it is still necessary to learn how to say it. This book focuses on "how to say it"—how to say it better, more effectively, more powerfully, and more persuasively, achieving the greatest effect with the least cost. "How to say it" is essentially speaking skills, speaking strategies, and the art of speaking. Therefore, this book specifically discusses legal language skills, precisely speaking, it discusses "how to say it" for those studying law in law school, especially those who are about to become judges, prosecutors, and lawyers, as well as those interested in the legal profession. These language skills or strategies may not make them famous judges, prosecutors, or invincible lawyers, but knowing and understanding these language strategies and skills will certainly help them move faster and more steadily on the path to these achievements—at least, they can help them become qualified judges, competent prosecutors, and qualified lawyers.
5. What content will this book cover?
1. It focuses on courtroom discourse, specifically Q&A. Why? Because the entire court trial process is based on Q&A. If we can compare the courtroom to a battlefield, then prosecutors, lawyers, and parties are all soldiers. On this "battlefield," the weapon that determines victory is language, and Q&A is the most important weapon.
2. It discusses skills around the law. To write this book, the author read many works on the art and skills of language. The author found that while language, the art of language, and language skills share many commonalities, courtroom language, the art of courtroom language, and courtroom language skills have a very important difference: courtroom language skills are constrained by "law." Any skill that departs from law and legal provisions is like a kite without a string—useless.
Finally, I want to tell the readers that legal issues are not simple skill issues. Skills are only one factor in winning courtroom debates. To win a courtroom debate, one must first have a solid theoretical foundation; second, one must have a solid practical foundation, such as thorough investigation and evidence collection. This book is primarily written using the author’s own collection of a large number of real recordings from court trial scenes, supplemented by appropriate explanations, to achieve the purpose of writing. I hope these real materials will help readers understand courtroom language skills.