1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Pragmatics
  4. Volume 32, Issue 4
  5. Article
Volume 32, Issue 4
  • ISSN 1018-2101
  • E-ISSN: 2406-4238
PDF
EPUB

Abstract

Abstract

Metapragmatic comments are crucial in lawyers’ attempts at managing legal advice communication with asylum seekers. Drawing on linguistic-ethnographic fieldwork in the Dutch-speaking part of Belgium, this paper aims to demonstrate how/when/why textual features which tell interactants how to interpret the ongoing speech are used in the context of lawyer-client communication in the field of immigration law. The data analysis reveals how lawyers frame the discursive conditions (i.e. linguistic diversity, the institutional need for efficiency and the presence of emotional lifeworld concerns) of the local interaction in the lawyer’s office. This is necessary as clients are not always acquainted with the discursive routines of the legal consultation, nor aware of its position within the wider chain of discursive asylum events. As many aspects of the legal advice context resemble the interactional conditions of the government-asylum seeker communication, it proves key yet challenging for lawyers to metapragmatically signal their advocating role in a way that enables a relationship of rapport with their client.

© International Pragmatics Association
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/prag.21047.jac
2021-12-20
2024-10-12

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/prag.21047.jac
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/prag.21047.jac.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1075/prag.21047.jac&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Ahmad, Muneer
    2007 “Interpreting Communities: Lawyering across Language Difference.” UCLA Law Review54: 999–1086.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Asylum Information Database
    Asylum Information Database 2019 Comparative Reports. Online: www.asylumineurope.org=comparator=asylum-procedure
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Barkai, John, and Virginia Fine
    1982 “Empathy Training for Lawyers and Law Students.” Southwestern University Law Review13: 505–530.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Bateson, Gregory
    1972 Steps to an Ecology of Mind. New York: Balantine.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Blommaert, Jan, James Collins, and Stef Slembrouck
    2005 “Spaces of Multilingualism.” Language & Communication25 (3): 197–216. 10.1016/j.langcom.2005.05.002
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langcom.2005.05.002 [Google Scholar]
  6. Bohmer, Carol, and Amy Shuman
    2007 Rejecting Refugees: Political Asylum in the 21st Century. London: Routledge. 10.4324/9780203937228
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203937228 [Google Scholar]
  7. Caffi, Claudia
    1998 “Metapragmatics.” InConcise Encyclopedia of Pragmatics, ed. ByJacob Mey, 581–586. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Cochran, Robert, John DiPippa, and Martha Peters
    2011 The Counselor-at-law: A Collaborative Approach to Client Interviewing and Counseling. New York: LexisNexis.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Copland, Fiona, and Angela Creese
    2015 Linguistic Ethnography: Collecting, Analysing and Presenting Data. London: SAGE. 10.4135/9781473910607
     https://doi.org/10.4135/9781473910607 [Google Scholar]
  10. Dahlvik, Julia
    2018 Inside Asylum Bureaucracy: Organizing Refugee Status Determination in Austria. Vienna: Springer Open. 10.1007/978‑3‑319‑63306‑0
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-63306-0 [Google Scholar]
  11. Dhondt, Benoit
    2021 Kinderen in een migratiecontext. Reflecties uit de praktijk [Sessie 1: Recht]. Retrieved fromCESSMIR.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Eades, Diana
    2010 Sociolinguistics and the Legal Process. Bristol: Multilingual Matters. 10.21832/9781847692559
     https://doi.org/10.21832/9781847692559 [Google Scholar]
  13. EU Agency for Fundamental Rights
    EU Agency for Fundamental Rights 2014 Handbook on European Law relating to Asylum, Borders and Immigration. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Fraser, Bruce
    1996 “Pragmatic Markers.” Pragmatics6 (2): 167–190. 10.1075/prag.6.2.03fra
     https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.6.2.03fra [Google Scholar]
  15. Gill, Nick
    2016 Nothing Personal? Geographies of Governing and Activism in the British Asylum System. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell. 10.1002/9781118315996
     https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118315996 [Google Scholar]
  16. Goffman, Erving
    1981 Forms of Talk. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Grice, Paul
    1975 Logic and Conversation. InSyntax and Semantics: Speech Arts, ed. ByPeter Cole, and Jerry Morgan, 41–58. New York: Academic Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Gumperz, John
    1992 “Contextualization and Understanding.” InRethinking Context: Language as an Interactive Phenomenon, ed. byAlessandro Duranti, and Charles Goodwin, 229–252. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Habermas, Jürgen
    1984 Was heißt Universalpragmatik? Vorstudien und Ergänzungen zur Theorie des Kommunikativen Handelns. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Hambly, Jessica
    2019 “Interactions and Identities in UK Asylum Appeals: Lawyers and Law in a Quasilegal Setting.” InAsylum Determination in Europe, ed. byNick Gill, and Anthony Good, 195–218. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1007/978‑3‑319‑94749‑5_10
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-94749-5_10 [Google Scholar]
  21. Hübler, Axel, and Wolfram Bublitz
    2007 “Introducing Metapragmatics in Use.” InMetapragmatics in Use, ed. byWolfram Bublitz and Axel Hübler, 1–26. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.165.02hub
     https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.165.02hub [Google Scholar]
  22. Hübler, Axel
    2011 “Metapragmatics.” InFoundations of Pragmatics, ed. byWolfram Bublitz, and Neal Norrick, 107–136. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110214260.107
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110214260.107 [Google Scholar]
  23. Inghilleri, Moira, and Katrijn Maryns
    2019 “Asylum.” InRoutledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies, ed. byMona Baker, and Gabriela Saldanha, 22–27. London: Routledge. 10.4324/9781315678627‑6
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315678627-6 [Google Scholar]
  24. Jacobs, Marie, and Katrijn Maryns
    2021 “Managing Narratives, Managing Identities: Language and Credibility in Legal Consultations with Asylum Seekers.” Language in Society, 1–28.   10.1017/S0047404521000117
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404521000117 [Google Scholar]
  25. Janney, Richard
    2007 “‘So your Story Now is that ...’: Metapragmatic Framing Strategies in Courtroom Interrogation.” InMetapragmatics in Use, ed. byWolfram Bublitz, and Axel Hübler, 223–235. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.165.15jan
     https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.165.15jan [Google Scholar]
  26. Jakobson, Roman
    1985 “Metalanguage as a Linguistic Problem.” InSelected Writings VII, ed. byStephen Rudy, and Linda Waugh, 113–121. Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110855463.113
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110855463.113 [Google Scholar]
  27. Jubany, Olga
    2011 “Constructing Truths in a Culture of Disbelief: Understanding Asylum Screening from Within.” International Sociology26 (1): 74–94. 10.1177/0268580910380978
     https://doi.org/10.1177/0268580910380978 [Google Scholar]
  28. Katzmann, Robert
    2008 “The Legal Profession and the Unmet Needs of the Immigrant Poor.” Georgetown Journal of Legal Ethics21: 3–30.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Lucy, John
    1993 Reflexive Language: Reported Speech and Metapragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511621031
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511621031 [Google Scholar]
  30. Maryns, Katrijn
    2006 The Asylum Speaker: Language in the Belgian Asylum Procedure. London: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Maryns, Katrijn, and Marie Jacobs
    2021 “Data Constitution and Engagement with the Field of Asylum and Migration.” Journal of Pragmatics178: 146–158. 10.1016/j.pragma.2021.03.008
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2021.03.008 [Google Scholar]
  32. Östman, Jan-Ola, Jef Verschueren, and Eline Versluys
    2007 Handbook of Pragmatics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/hop.11
     https://doi.org/10.1075/hop.11 [Google Scholar]
  33. Penz, Hermine
    2007 “Building Common Ground through Metapragmatic Comments in International Project Work.” InMetapragmatics in Use, ed. byWolfram Bublitz, and Axel Hübler, 263–293. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.165.17pen
     https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.165.17pen [Google Scholar]
  34. Rampton, Ben, Karin Tusting, Janet Maybin, Richard Barwell, Angela Creese, and Lytra Vally
    2004 UK Linguistic Ethnography: A Discussion Paper. Online: https:==drive.google.com=file=d=0B5slLqugzxccmJ4TmlTblhsazA=view
  35. Reynolds, Judith
    2020 “Investigating the Language-Culture nexus in Refugee Legal Advice Meetings.” Multilingua39 (4): 395–429. 10.1515/multi‑2019‑0048
     https://doi.org/10.1515/multi-2019-0048 [Google Scholar]
  36. Severijns, Ralph
    2019 Zoeken naar zekerheid. Een onderzoek naar de vaststelling van feiten door hoor-en beslismedewerkers van de Immigratie-en Naturalisatiedienst in de Nederlandse asielprocedure. Deventer: Wolters Kluwer.
     [Google Scholar]
  37. Silverstein, Mark
    1993 “Metapragmatic Discourse and Metapragmatic Function.” InReflexive Language. Reported Speech and Metapragmatics, ed. byJohn Lucy, 33–58. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511621031.004
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511621031.004 [Google Scholar]
  38. Smith-Khan, Laura
    2020 “Migration Practitioners’ Roles in Communicating Credible Refugee Claims.” Alternative Law Journal45 (2): 119–124. 10.1177/1037969X19884205
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1037969X19884205 [Google Scholar]
  39. Verschueren, Jef
    2000 “Notes on the Role of Metapragmatic Awareness in Language Use.” Pragmatics10 (4): 439–456. 10.1075/prag.10.4.02ver
     https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.10.4.02ver [Google Scholar]
  40. Westaby, Chalen, and Emma Jones
    2018 “Empathy: An Essential Element of Legal Practice or ‘Never the Twain Shall Meet’?” International Journal of the Legal Profession25(1): 107–124. 10.1080/09695958.2017.1359615
     https://doi.org/10.1080/09695958.2017.1359615 [Google Scholar]
  41. Zwier, Paul, and Ann Hamric
    1996 “The Ethics of Care and Reimagining the Lawyer-Client Relationship.” Journal of Contemporary Law22: 383–434.
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/prag.21047.jac
Loading
  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): frame; interactional management; lawyer-client relationship; legal advice communication; linguistic ethnography; metapragmatics

Most Cited

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error