1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Register Studies
  4. Online First Articles
  5. Online First Article
image of “How could you be wrong about something so general as that?”
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Adopting a corpus-based register approach, this study explores the extent to which television courtroom discourse aligns with or diverges from authentic courtroom language, thereby contributing to broader discussions of register variation. In particular, drawing on the analytical framework for situational characteristics proposed by Biber and Conrad (2019), the present study offers a systematic account of the situational features associated with four sub-registers of courtroom discourse — opening statements, direct examinations, cross-examinations, and closing arguments — across both authentic and TV courtroom settings. In this study, Biber’s (1988) Multi-Dimensional Analysis (MDA) model is applied to situate the eight sub-registers within predefined dimensions and to guide the identification of relevant linguistic features for subsequent quantitative examination and functional interpretation. The findings reveal notable differences between authentic and TV cross-examinations as well as between authentic and TV closing arguments. These contrasts are primarily attributable to the different communicative purposes of the sub-registers, thereby underscoring the significance of sub-register distinctions in register-based research. The present study builds upon an unpublished dissertation (Chen, 2018) that investigated the similarities and differences between authentic and TV courtroom discourse.

© John Benjamins Publishing Company
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/rs.24026.che
2026-06-02
2026-06-17

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/rs.24026.che
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Al-Surmi, M.
    (2012) Authenticity and TV Shows: A Multidimensional Analysis Perspective. TESOL Quarterly, (), –. 10.1002/tesq.33
     https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.33 [Google Scholar]
  2. Atkinson, M. & Drew, P.
    (1979) “Order in Court: The Organisation of Verbal Interaction in Judicial Settings”, London, Macmillan. DOI not available. 10.1007/978‑1‑349‑04057‑5
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-04057-5 [Google Scholar]
  3. Bednarek, M.
    (2015) Corpus-assisted multimodal discourse analysis of television and film narratives. InP. Baker & T. McEnery (Eds.), Corpora and discourse studies: Integrating discourse and corpora (pp.–). Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1057/9781137431738_4
     https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137431738_4 [Google Scholar]
  4. (2018) Language and Television Series: A Linguistic Approach to TV Dialogue. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781108559553
     https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108559553 [Google Scholar]
  5. (2020) The Sydney Corpus of Television Dialogue: Designing and building a corpus of dialogue from US TV series. Corpora, (), –. 10.3366/cor.2020.0187
     https://doi.org/10.3366/cor.2020.0187 [Google Scholar]
  6. Boston Legal
    Boston Legal (2012) Episodes from Boston Legal. Retrieved from: boston-legal.org/episodes.shtml
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Biber, D.
    (1988) Variation across speech and writing. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511621024
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511621024 [Google Scholar]
  8. (2014) Using multi-dimensional analysis to explore cross-linguistic universals of register variation. Languages in Contrast, (), –. 10.1075/lic.14.1.02bib
     https://doi.org/10.1075/lic.14.1.02bib [Google Scholar]
  9. Biber, D., & Conrad, S.
    (2019) Register, genre, and style (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781108686136
     https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108686136 [Google Scholar]
  10. Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S., & Finegan, E.
    (1999) Longman grammar of spoken and written English. Longman. 10.1162/089120101300346831
     https://doi.org/10.1162/089120101300346831 [Google Scholar]
  11. Chen, M.
    (2018) A comparison of the situational and linguistic features of high-profile criminal trials and TV series courtroom trials [Doctoral dissertation, Northern Arizona University].
  12. (2021) Is courtroom discourse an ‘oral’ or ‘literate’ register? The importance of sub- register. Discourse Studies. (), –. 10.1177/1461445620982097
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445620982097 [Google Scholar]
  13. Chen, M., & Reppen, R.
    (2020) A look at WH-questions in direct and cross-examinations: Authentic vs. TV courtroom language. Documentação de Estudos Em Lingüística Teórica e Aplicada, (), –. 10.1590/1678‑460x2020360310
     https://doi.org/10.1590/1678-460x2020360310 [Google Scholar]
  14. Corcos, C.
    (2003) Legal fictions: Irony, storytelling, truth, and justice in the modern courtroom drama. University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review, (), –.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Cotterill, J.
    (2003) Language and power in court: A linguistic analysis of the O.J. Simpson trial. Palgrave MacMillan. 10.1057/9780230006010
     https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230006010 [Google Scholar]
  16. Coulthard, M., Johnson, A., & Wright, D.
    (2017) An introduction to forensic linguistics: Language in evidence (2nd ed.). Routledge. 10.4324/9781315630311
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315630311 [Google Scholar]
  17. Curry, M.
    (2017) Trial Fundamental: A concise handbook on the basics of courtroom evidence, procedure, and tactics. CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Dąbrowski, A.
    (2012) When law goes pop — teaching Legal English through TV courtroom shows. Applied Linguistics, , –. 10.14746/gl.2016.43.2.06
     https://doi.org/10.14746/gl.2016.43.2.06 [Google Scholar]
  19. Csomay, E., & Petrović, M.
    (2012) “Yes, your honor!”: A corpus-based study of technical vocabulary in discipline-related movies and TV shows, System, (), –. 10.1016/j.system.2012.05.004
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2012.05.004 [Google Scholar]
  20. Flowerdew, J., & Miller, L.
    (2005) Second language listening: Theory and practice. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511667244
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511667244 [Google Scholar]
  21. Forchini, P.
    (2017) A multi-dimensional analysis of legal American English: Real-life and cinematic representations compared. International Journal of Language Studies, (), –.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Heffer, C.
    (2005) The counsel as narrator. InThe language of jury trial: A corpus-aided analysis of legal-lay discourse. Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1057/9780230502888_4
     https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230502888_4 [Google Scholar]
  23. Harris, S.
    (2001) Fragmented narratives and multiple tellers: witness and defendant accounts in trials. Discourse Studies, (), –. 10.1177/1461445601003001003
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445601003001003 [Google Scholar]
  24. Kelley, D. E.
    (Executive Producer) (2004–2008) Boston Legal [TV series]. David E. Kelley Productions; 20th Century Fox Television.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Korsh, A.
    (Executive Producer) (2011–2019) Suits [TV series]. Hypnotic; Universal Cable Productions.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Kozloff, S.
    (2000) Overhearing Film Dialogue. Berkeley: University of California Press. 10.1525/9780520924024
     https://doi.org/10.1525/9780520924024 [Google Scholar]
  27. Larsson, T.
    (2024) https://linguisticswithacorpus.wordpress.com/2024/09/30/no-one-has-ever-looked-at-this-before-can-we-do-better-than-that/, retrieved on11/03/2024.
  28. Linder, D.
    (2017) Famous trials. Available at: https://www.famous-trials.com/
  29. Murder One
    Murder One (1996) Complete Transcripts for Season One. Retrieved from: https://subslikescript.com/series/Murder_One-112086
  30. Patrick, G.
    (Executive Producer) (1957–1966) Perry Mason [TV series]. CBS.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Quaglio, P.
    (2009) Television dialogue: The sitcom Friends vs. Natural conversation. John Benjamins. 10.1075/scl.36
     https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.36 [Google Scholar]
  32. Sherman, J.
    (2003) Using authentic video in the language classroom. Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. The Practice
    The Practice (2000) The Practice Transcripts. Retrieved fromhttps://subslikescript.com/series/The_Practice-118437
  34. Webb, S.
    (2010) Pre-learning low-frequency vocabulary in second language television programmes. Language Teaching Research, (), –. 10.1177/1362168810375371
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168810375371 [Google Scholar]
  35. Wolf, D.
    (Executive Producer) (1990–2010) Law & Order [TV series]. Wolf Films; Universal Television.
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/rs.24026.che
Loading
“How could you be wrong about something so general as that?”
John Benjamins ; https://doi.org/10.1075/rs.24026.che
/content/journals/10.1075/rs.24026.che
/content/journals/10.1075/rs.24026.che
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keywords: corpus approach ; Register analysis ; multi-dimensional analysis ; courtroom language

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