Cover not available

In:Engagement in Professional Genres:
Edited by Carmen Sancho Guinda
[Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 301] 2019
► pp. 101–118

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

Chapter 6
Interrogative engagement as a pragmatic and textual function in Legal Studies

 | University of Bergamo, Italy
Published online: 24 April 2019
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.301.06sal
Abstract
This chapter investigates the use of interrogative sentences in legal studies, a domain where persuasion does not benefit from corpus-based evidence but is an eminently discourse-based construct. Questions are particularly strategic tools to align readers to the writer’s point of view and guide interpretation, since they can be employed to both organize the argumentation and anticipate problematic aspects or doubts with the purpose of neutralizing them. Based on a corpus of 90 legal research articles taken from CADIS, this chapter examines questions according to their pragmatic and textual aspect, and assesses their specificity to the legal domain by comparing their frequency and function with a reference corpus of 270 research articles in other academic domains (applied linguistics, economics and medicine).
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
    • 1.1Interpersonality and engagement
    • 1.2Questions as engagement resources
  • 2.Material and method
  • 3.Results
    • 3.1Engagement as a pragmatic function
    • 3.2Engagement as a textual function
  • 4.Discussion
  • 5.Concluding remarks
  • References
References (68)
References
Anesa, Patrizia. 2012. Jury Trials and the Popularization of Legal Language: A Discourse Analytical Approach. Bern: Peter Lang. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Apple, James, and Robert Deyling. 1995. A Primer on the Civil-Law System. Washington, D. C.: Federal Judicial Center.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bakhtin, Mikhail. 1981. The Dialogic Imagination: Four Essays by M. M. Bakhtin. ed. by Michael Holquist. Translated by Caryl Emerson, and Michael Holquist. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bhatia, Vijay. 1982. An Investigation into Formal and Functional Characteristics of Qualifications in Legislative Writing and Its Application to English for Academic Legal Purposes. Ph.D. Thesis. The University of Aston in Birmingham, UK.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2012. “Interdiscursivity in Academic Genres.” In Insights into Academic Genres, ed. by Carol Berkenkotter, Vijay Bhatia, and Maurizio Gotti, 47–65. Bern: Peter Lang. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Biber, Douglas, Stig Johansson, Geoffrey Leech, Susan Conrad, and Edward Finegan. 1999. Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. London: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bolinger, Dwight. 1957. Interrogative Structures of America English: The Direct Question. Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Breeze, Ruth. 2009. “Issues of Persuasion in Academic Law Abstracts.” Revista Alicantina de Estudios Ingleses 22: 11–26. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Breeze, Ruth, Maurizio Gotti, and Carmen Sancho Guinda, eds. 2014. Interpersonality in Legal Genres. Bern: Peter Lang. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bruffee, Kenneth. 1986. “Social Construction: Language and the Authority of Knowledge. A Biographical Essay.” College English 48: 773–779. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Calleros, Charles. 2002. Legal Method and Writing. New York: Aspen.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Carter, Ronald, and Michael McCarthy. 2006. Cambridge Grammar of English. A Comprehensive Guide. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Catenaccio, Paola. 2015. “The Representation of Gambling in Gambling Awareness Campaigns: The Discursive Construction of Addiction.” In Insights into Medical Communication, ed. by Maurizio Gotti, Stefania Maci, and Michele Sala, 269–292. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Clayman, Steven. 2010. “Questions in Broadcast Journalism.” In ‘Why Do You Ask?’ The Function of Questions in Institutional Discourse, ed. by Alice Freed, and Susan Ehlich, 256–278. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Downing, Angela, and Philip Locke. 2006. English Grammar. A University Course. London: Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Erman, Britt, and Beatrice Warren. 2000. “The Idiom Principle and the Open Choice Principle.” Text 20 (1): 29–62. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Frege, Gottlob. 1892. “On Sense and Nomination.” In The Philosophy of Language, ed. by Aloysius Martinich 1986, 186–198. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Geertz, Clifford. 1983. Local Knowledge: Further Essays in Interpretive Anthropology. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Giannoni, Davide S. 2008. “Popularizing Features in English Journal Editorials.” English for Specific Purposes 27: 212–232. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gibbons, John. 2003. Forensic Linguistics. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gil-Salom, Luz, and Carmen Soler-Monreal, eds. 2014. Dialogicity in Written Specialised Genres. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gotti, Maurizio. 2003. Specialized Discourse. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2010. “Identity Traits in Written Academic Discourse across Languages and Cultures.” In Contructing Interpersonality: Multiple Perspectives on Written Academic Genres, ed. by Rosa Lorés-Sanz, Pilar Mur-Dueñas, and Enrique Lafuente-Millán, 41–59. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
, ed. 2012. Academic Identity Traits. A Corpus Based Investigation. Bern: Peter Lang. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Greenbaum, Sidney, and Randolph Quirk. 1990. A Student’s Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Halliday, Michael A. K., and Christian Matthiessen. 1994. An Introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hawking, Stephen. 1993. Black Holes and Baby Universes and Other Essays. New York: Bantam.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hiltunen, Risto. 1990. Chapters on Legal English. Aspects Past and Present of the Language of the Law. Helsinki: Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hudson, Richard. 1975. “The Meaning of Questions.” Language 51 (1): 1–31. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hyland, Ken. 2000. Disciplinary Discourses. Social Interaction in Academic Writing. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2002. “What Do They Mean? Questions in Academic Writing.” Text 22 (4): 529–557. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2005a. Metadiscourse. London: Continuum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2005b. “Stance and Engagement. A Model of Interaction in Academic Discourse.” Discourse Studies 7/2: 173–192. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jacquemet, Marco. 1996. Credibility in Court: Communicative Practices in the Camorra Trials. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jaffe, Alexandra, ed. 2009. Stance: Sociolinguistic Perspectives. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Knorr-Cetina, Karin. 1981. The Manufacture of Knowledge. Oxford: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Koshik, Irene. 2003. “Wh-Questions Used as Challenges.” Discourse Studies 5 (1): 51–77. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Liao, Meizhen. 2012. “Courtroom Discourse in China.” In The Oxford Handbook of Language and Law, ed. by Peter Tiersma, and Lawrence Solan, 395–407. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lukin, Annabelle. 2012. “Evaluative Questions in Journalism: A Case Study of the Australian Public Broadcaster’s Coverage of the 2003 Invasion of Iraq.” Journal of Applied Linguistics and Professional Practice 9 (1): 127–147.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lung, Jane. 2008. “Discursive Hierarchical Patterning in Law and Management Cases.” English for Specific Purposes 27 (4): 424–441. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Martin, James, and White Peter. 2005. The Language of Evaluation: Appraisal in English. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mazzi, Davide. 2015. “Semantic Sequences and the Pragmatics of Medical Research Article Writing.” In Insights into Medical Communication, ed. by Maurizio Gotti, Stefania Maci, and Michele Sala, 353–368. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pascual, Esther. 2002. Imaginary Trialogues: Conceptual Blending and Fictive Interaction in Criminal Courts. Utrecht: LOT Dissertation Series 68.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2006. “Questions in Legal Monologues: Fictive Interaction as Argumentative Strategy in a Murder Trial.” Text & Talk 26 (3): 383–402. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Piazza, Roberta. 2002. “The Pragmatics of Conducive Questions in Academic Discourse.” Journal of Pragmatics 43 (5): 509–527. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Riemer, Nick. 2010. Introducing Semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rorty, Richard. 1979. Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rowley-Jolivet, Elizabeth. 2002. “Visual Discourse in Scientific Conference Papers: A Genre-Based Study.” English for Specific Purposes 21 (1): 19–40. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sadock, Jerrold. 1974. Toward a Linguistic Theory of Speech Acts. New York & London: Academic Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sala, Michele. 2012. “Interrogative Forms as Engagement Markers: A Diachronic Perspective.” In Academic Identity Traits. A Corpus Based Investigation, ed. by Maurizio Gotti, 221–240. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2014. “Interpersonal and Interactional Markers in Legal Research Articles.” In Interpersonality in Legal Genres, ed. by Ruth Breeze, Maurizio Gotti, and Carmen Sancho Guinda, 113–136. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sala, Michele, and Stefania Consonni. 2018. English Language across Contexts, Media and Modes. Bergamo: Centro Editoriale Librario Studium Bergomense. [URL]Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sancho Guinda, Carmen, Maurizio Gotti, and Ruth Breeze. 2014. “Framing Interpersonality in Law Contexts.” In Interpersonality in Legal Genres, ed. by Ruth Breeze, Maurizio Gotti, and Carmen Sancho Guinda, 9–35. Bern: Peter Lang. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Scott, Mike. 2007. WordSmith Tools Version 5.0. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stygal, Gail. 2012. “Discourse in the US Courtroom.” In The Oxford Handbook of Language and Law, ed. by Peter Tiersma, and Lawrence Solan, 369–380. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tench, Paul. 1988. The Roles of Intonation in English Discourse. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Thompson, Geoff. 2001. “Interaction in Academic Writing: Learning to Argue with the Reader.” Applied Linguistics 22 (1): 58–78. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Thompson, Susan. 1995. “Teaching Intonation on Questions.” ELT Journal 49 (3): 235–243. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tiersma, Peter. 1999. Legal Language. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tiersma, Peter, and Lawrence Solan, eds. 2012. The Oxford Handbook of Language and Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
van Eemeren, Frans, and Rob Grootendorst. 2004. A Systematic Theory of Argumentation. The Pragma-Dialectal Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Walton, Dougla. 1998. The New Dialectic: Conversational Contexts of Argument. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Walton, Douglass, Chris Reed, and Fabrizio Macagno. 2008. Argumentation Schemes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Webber, Pauline. 1994. “The Function of Questions in Different Medical English Genres.” English for Specific Purposes 13: 257–268. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Williams, Christopher. 2007. Tradition and Change in Legal English. Verbal Constructions in Prescriptive Texts. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ziman, John. 1984. An Introduction to Science Studies: The Philosophical and Social Aspects of Science and Technology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (2)

Cited by two other publications

Bocanegra-Valle, Ana
2023. Engaging in predatory practices: How editors persuade prospective authors. Círculo de Lingüística Aplicada a la Comunicación 93 ► pp. 117 ff. DOI logo
Tereszkiewicz, Anna
2023. Engagement strategies on medical YouTube channels. Studia Linguistica Universitatis Iagellonicae Cracoviensis 140:2 ► pp. 139 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 28 november 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