Abstract
This chapter investigates how the rational discourse of lawyer evaluation performs its function in relation to legal dispute resolution or criminal case disposition in the court. As illustrated by data, lawyers argue their cases and negotiate justice in three aspects, the accuracy or clarity of facts, the categorical meanings of a specific charge or claim, and the appropriacy or fairness of legal decisions.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Atkinson, R.C., and P. Drew. 1990. Order in Court. Hampshire and London: Macmillan Academic and Professional Ltd.
Bakhtin, M. 1984. Problems of Dostoevsky’s Poetics, ed. C. Emerson. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Chafe, W. 1979. The Pear Story: Cognitive, Cultural and Linguistic Aspects of Narrative Production. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Channell, J. 1994. Vague Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Cheng, Chun-hua. and Bin Huang. 2002. 试论建立现代自由心证制度 [Tentative thoughts on the establishment of a modern system of free assessment of evidence]. **司法审判论坛第二卷[China Judicial Trial Forum (vol.2)]. Bei**g: Law Press.
Cotterill, J. 2001. Domestic discord, rocky relationships: Semantic prosodies in representations of marital violence in the courtroom. Discourse & Society 12 (3): 315–336. https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926501012003002.
Danet, B. 1980. “Baby” or “fetus”: Language and the construction of reality in a manslaughter trial. Semiotica 32: 187–219. https://doi.org/10.1515/semi.1980.32.3-4.187.
Drew, P. 1990. Strategies in the contest between lawyer and witness in cross-examination. In Language in the Judicial Process, eds. Levi, J.N., and A.G. Walker, 39–64. New York and London: Plenum Press. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-3719-3_2.
Drew, P. 1992. Contested evidence in courtroom examinations. In Talk at Work: Interaction in Institutional Settings, ed. P. Drew and J. Heritage, 470–520. New York: Plenum Press.
Du, **-bang. (2001). 从法律语言的模糊性到司法结果的确定性 [From the vagueness of legal language to the definiteness of judicial outcomes]. 现代外语[Modern Foreign Languages] (3), 305–310.
Goodwin, C., and M.H. Goodwin. 1997. Contested version: The discursive constitution of Rodney King. In The Construction of Professional Discourse, eds. Britt-Louise Gunnarsson, P. Linell et al, 292–316. London and New York: Longman.
Lakoff, G. 1987. Cognitive models and prototype theory. In Concepts and Conceptual Development: Ecological and Intellectual Factors in Categorization, ed. U. Neisser, 63–100. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Loftus, E.F., and J.C. Palmer. 1974. Reconstruction of automobile destruction: An example of the interaction between language and memory. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior. 13: 585–589. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5371(74)80011-3.
Matoesian, G.M. 1993. Reproducing Rape: Dominance Through Talk in the Courtroom. Oxford: Polity Press.
Posner, R.A. 1990. The Problems of Jurisprudence. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Rogers, L., and E. Erez. 1999. Contextualization of objectivity in sentencing among legal professionals in South Australia. International Journal of the Sociology of Law 27: 267–286. https://doi.org/10.1006/ijsl.1999.0092.
Rosch, E., B. Mervis, W.D. Gray, et al. 1976. Basic objects in natural categories. Cognitive Psychology 8: 382–439. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(76)90013-X.
Sacks, H. 1972. On the analyzability of stories by children. In Directions in Sociolinguistics: The Ethnography of Communication, eds. Gumperz, J.J., and D.H. Hymes, 325–345. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Simpson, P. 1993. Language, Ideology, and Point of View. London and New York: Routledge.
Stiff, J., and P. Mongeau. 2003. Persuasive Communication, 2nd ed. New York and London: The Guilford Press.
Voloshinov, V.N. 1973. Marxism and the Philosophy of Language. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Xue, Shao-feng. 1996. 律师论辩学[Lawyers’ Advocacy]. Bei**g: People’s Public Security University of China Press.
Yong, Q., Cheng-guang **, and Rong-mao Yao. 2002. 法律适用中的逻辑[Logic in Law Application]. Bei**g: China University of Political Science and Law.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2024 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Zhang, L. (2024). Lawyer Evaluation in Action: Negotiating Justice. In: Lawyer Evaluation in Chinese Courtroom. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-97-1211-3_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-97-1211-3_7
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-97-1210-6
Online ISBN: 978-981-97-1211-3
eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)