Cover not available

Article published In: English Text Construction
Vol. 14:2 (2021) ► pp.231–252

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
authorization required

Stance and engagement in selected Nigerian Supreme Court judgments

 | Redeemer’s University
 | Redeemer’s University
Published online: 24 May 2022
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/etc.21021.dan
Abstract
The study investigates stance and engagement strategies of Nigerian Supreme Court judges in constructing arguments in their opinions. Fifty purposively selected judicial opinions were quantitatively and qualitatively analysed using Hyland’s stance and engagement model. The findings reveal that Nigerian Supreme Court judges used more stance than engagement features. Among the stance features found, the judges used more self-mention devices to establish authorial presence and distinguish their views from others. Prevalent among engagement markers, on the other hand, are directives, informed by the normative nature of the text and the judges’ keenness to owning such prescribed norms.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Judgment in the Nigerian Supreme Court
  • 3.The stance and engagement model in judicial opinions
  • 4.Data and method
  • 5.Findings and analysis
    • 5.1Stance features in the Supreme Court judgments
      • 5.1.1Self-mention features in the judgments
      • 5.1.2Attitude markers in the judgments
      • 5.1.3Boosters in the judgments
      • 5.1.4Hedges in the judgments
    • 5.2Engagement features in Nigerian Supreme Court judgments
      • 5.2.1Directives in the judgments
      • 5.2.2Knowledge reference in the judgments
      • 5.2.3Questions in the judgments
      • 5.2.4Reader pronouns
      • 5.2.5Asides in the judgments
  • 6.Concluding discussion
  • Acknowledgements
  • References
References (43)
References
Agaba, James. 2015. Practical Approach to Criminal Litigation in Nigeria (3rd ed.). Lagos: Nelag Company Limited.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Asein, John. 2005. Introduction to Nigerian Legal System. Lagos: Ababa Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bhatia, Vijay. 1993. Analysing Genre: Language Use in Professional Settings. London: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Biber, Douglas & Conrad, Susan. 2009. Register, Genre and Style. New York: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Biber, Douglas & Finegan, Edward. 1989. Styles of stance in English lexical and grammatical marking of evidentiality and affect. Text 9(1): 93–124.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Breeze, Ruth. 2013. Lexical bundles across four legal genres. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 18(2): 229–253. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2018. Giving voice to the law. Speech act verbs in legal academic writing. In Phraseology in Legal and Institutional Settings: A Corpus-based Interdisciplinary Perspective, Goźdź-Roszkowski Stanisław & Pontrandolfo Gianluca (eds). London: Routledge, 221–239.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chaemsaithong, Krisda. 2005. Stance expressions in the courtroom. English Language and Linguistics 21(2): 41–59. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2017. Evaluative stancetaking in courtroom opening statements. Folia Linguistica 51(1): 103–132. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Daniel, Florence Oluwaseyi. 2021. A genre analysis of selected substance-based judgments of the Nigerian Supreme Court. Covenant Journal of Language Studies 9(1): 55–70.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Daniel, Florence Oluwaseyi & Unuabonah, Foluke Olayinka. (2020). The generic structure of procedure-based Nigerian Supreme Court judgments. JESAN 22(2): 143–159.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Du Bois, John. 2007. The stance triangle. In Stancetaking in Discourse: Subjectivity, Evaluation and Interaction, Englebretson Robert (ed.). Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 139–182. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Federal Judicial Centre. 2013. Judicial writing manual: A pocket guide for judges (2nd ed.).Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Feteris, Eveline. 1999. Fundamentals of Legal Argumentation: A Survey of Theories on the Justification of Judicial Decisions (2nd ed.). Netherlands: Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2016. Prototypical argumentative patterns in a legal context: The role of pragmatic argumentation in the justification of legal decision. Argumentation 29(3): 61–79. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Finegan, Edward. 2010. Corpus linguistics approaches to ‘legal language’: Adverbial expression of attitude and emphasis in Supreme Court opinions. In The Routledge Handbook of Forensic Linguistics, Coulthard Malcom & Johnson Alison (eds). London: Routledge, 65–77.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goźdź-Roszkowski, Stanislaw. 2019. ‘It’s not just a fact that the law requires this, but it is a reasonable fact: Using the Noun that-pattern to explore stance construction in legal writing. In Corpus-based Research on Variation English Legal Discourse, Fanego Teresa & Rodríguez-Puente Paula (eds). Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 123–146. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goźdź-Roszkowski, Stanisław & Pontrandolfo, Gianluca. 2013. Evaluative patterns in judicial discourse: A corpus-based phraseological perspective on American and Italian criminal judgments. International Journal of Law, Language and Discourse 13(2): 9–69.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2014. Facing the facts: Evaluative patterns in English and Italian judicial language. In Language and Law in Professional Discourse: Issues and Perspectives, Guliana Garzone, Salvi Rita, Tessuto Girolamo, Williams Christopher, & Bhatia Vijay (eds). Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholar, 10–28.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(eds). 2018. Phraseology in Legal and Institutional Settings. A Corpus-based Interdisciplinary Perspective. London: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Heffer, Chris. 2007. Judgment in court: Evaluating participants in courtroom discourse. In Language and the Law: International Outlooks, Kredens Krzysztof & Goźdź-Roszkowski Stanisław (eds). Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 45–179.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hyland, Ken. (2004). Disciplinary interactions: Metadiscourse in L2 postgraduate writing. Journal of Second Language Writing 131, 133-151. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2005. Stance and engagement: A model of interaction in academic discourse. Discourse Studies 7(2): 173–192. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2005. Metadiscourse: Exploring Interaction in Writing. London: Continuum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2008. Persuasion, interaction and the construction of knowledge: Representing self and others in research writing. International Journal of English Studies 8(2): 1–23.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2010. Metadiscourse: Mapping interactions in academic writing. Nordic Journal of English Studies 9(2): 125–143. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2011. Disciplines and discourses: Social interactions in the construction of knowledge. In Writing in the Knowledge Society, Starke-Meyerring, Doreen & Pare, Anthony & Artemeva, Natasha & Horne, Miriam & Yousoubova, Larissa (eds). West Lafayette: Parlor Press, 193–214. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hyland, Ken & Tse, Polly. 2004. Metadiscourse in academic writing: A reappraisal. Applied Linguistics (25)21: 156–177. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hunston, Susan. & Thompson, Geoffery (eds). 2000. Evaluation in Text: Authorial Stance and the Construction of Discourse. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kalejaiye, Abiola Sakirat. 2016. A linguistic analysis of selected Nigerian appellate court judgments. PhD dissertation, Babcock University.
Keramati, Rezaei Shirin, Kuhi Davud, & Saeidi Mahnaz. 2019. Cross-sectional diachronic corpus analysis of stance and engagement markers in three leading journals of Applied Linguistics. Journal of Modern Research in English Language Studies 6(2): 1–25.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kurzon, Dennis. 2001. The politeness of judges: American and English judicial behaviour. Journal of Pragmatics 33(1): 61–85. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Leubsdorf, John. 2001. The structure of judicial opinions. Minnesota Law Review 86(447): 447–496.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Martin, James & White, Peter. 2005. The Language of Evaluation: Appraisal in English. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mazzi, Davide. 2010. ‘This argument fails for two reasons…’: A linguistic analysis of judicial evaluation strategies in US Supreme Court judgments. International Journal for the Semiotics of Law 23(4): 373–385. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2014. ‘The words are plain and clear…’: On interpersonal positioning in the discourse of judicial interpretation. In Interpersonality in Legal Genres, Breeze Ruth, Gotti Maurizio, & Guinda Carmen Sancho (eds). Switzerland: Peter Lang, 39–62.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ogunsiji, Ayotunde. & Olaosun Ibrahim. 2012. Pragmatic acts in court-rulings: A case of Nigeria’s Supreme Court judgement on Obi versus Uba. Papers in English and Linguistics 168–181.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sanni, Oluwole Oluwatobi. 2016. The role of forensic linguistics in courtroom cross examination. Ife Studies in English 12(2): 1–12.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Solan, Lawrence. 1993. The Language of Judges. Chicago IL: The University of Chicago Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Szczyrbak, Magdalena. 2014. Stancetaking strategies in judicial discourse: Evidence from US Supreme Court opinions. Studia Linguistica Iagellonicae Cracoviensis 1311: 91–120.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tracy, Hodge & Hodge, Danielle. 2018. Judge discourse moves that enact and endanger procedural justice. Discourse and Society 29(1): 63–85. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Vazquez-Orta, Ignacio. 2013. Authoritative intervention in legal discourse: A genre-based study of judgements and arbitration awards. Revista Española de Lingüística Aplicada 91–104.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (7)

Cited by seven other publications

Liu, Xiuli
2025. Mapping Stance in Data Protection Judgments: Towards an Integrated Framework for Judicial Discourse. International Journal of Digital Law and Governance DOI logo
Shi, Chunxu
2025. Negotiating the value of rule of law through attitudinal positioning. Pragmatics and Society 16:1 ► pp. 67 ff. DOI logo
Wu, Shuangjiao, Mansour Amini & Omer Hassan Ali Mahfoodh
2025. Unveiling Certainty and Doubt: A Systemic Functional Exploration of Epistemic Modality in Courtroom Discourse. International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue internationale de Sémiotique juridique DOI logo
Daniel, Florence Oluwaseyi
2024.  That-complement clauses signalling stance in Nigerian Supreme Court lead judgements: a corpus-based study. International Journal of Legal Discourse 9:1 ► pp. 121 ff. DOI logo
Daniel, Florence Oluwaseyi
2025. Dissenting with Conviction and Deference: Boosters and Hedges in Nigerian Supreme Court Dissents. International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue internationale de Sémiotique juridique 38:5 ► pp. 1579 ff. DOI logo
Daniel, Florence Oluwaseyi
2025. “But I think, with respect, that the trial court was wrong”: but signalling stance in Nigerian Supreme Court Judgements. Folia Linguistica DOI logo
Alaghbary, Gibreel Sadeq
2023. Is stylistics a hard science? Intersubjective positioning in Language and Literature research article abstracts between 2013 and 2022. Heliyon 9:11 ► pp. e22114 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 9 december 2025. 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.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue