In:Dimensions of Forensic Linguistics
Edited by John Gibbons and M. Teresa Turell
[AILA Applied Linguistics Series 5] 2008
► pp. 231–247
Trademarks and other proprietary terms
Published online: 21 November 2008
https://doi.org/10.1075/aals.5.16but
https://doi.org/10.1075/aals.5.16but
Especially in North America, trademark litigation constitutes a prominent area of applied linguistics. As legal consultants, linguists bring their professional expertise to bear upon three issues: (1) likelihood of confusion of two marks; (2) categorization of the strength of a mark with respect to its place on a continuum of semantic/pragmatic categories technically labeled “generic,” “descriptive,” “suggestive,” “fanciful,” and “arbitrary”; and (3) propriety of a mark, that is, whether it is “scandalous,” or “disparaging.” Consulting linguists typically write descriptive reports that analyze the linguistic facts underlying the issues of particular cases – sometimes in rebuttal to other linguists’ reports. Often, linguists are also called upon to give sworn testimony based upon the reports they have prepared.
Cited by (13)
Cited by 13 other publications
Sousa-Silva, Rui
Nini, Andrea
Okawara, Mami Hiraike
Shuy, Roger W.
Mohd Anuar, Fatahiyah, Rossitza Setchi & Yu-Kun Lai
Butters, Ronald R.
Butters, Ronald R.
Butters, Ronald R.
Guillén-Nieto, Victoria
2011. The Linguist as Expert Witness in The Community Trademark Courts. ITL - International Journal of Applied Linguistics 162 ► pp. 63 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 6 march 2026. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.
