Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Values and Valuations in Judicial Discourse. A Corpus-Assisted Study of (Dis)Respect in US Supreme Court Decisions on Same-Sex Marriage Cover

Values and Valuations in Judicial Discourse. A Corpus-Assisted Study of (Dis)Respect in US Supreme Court Decisions on Same-Sex Marriage

Studies in Logic, Grammar and Rhetoric
Volume 53 (2018): Issue 1 (March 2018)
By:
Open Access
|Oct 2018

References

  1. Breeze, R. 2011. ‘Disciplinary values in legal discourse: a corpus study.’ <em>Iberica</em> 21, 93–116.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  2. Brostoff, T. &amp; Sinsheimer, A. 2003. <em>Legal English. An Introduction to the Legal Language and Culture of the United States</em>. New York: Oceana Publications, Inc.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  3. Fairclough, I. and Fairclough, N. 2012. ‘Values as premises in practical arguments: Conceptions of justice in the public debate over bankers’ bonuses’ in: van Emerson, F. and Garssen, B. (eds.) <em>Exploring Argumentative Contexts</em>, pp. 23–41. Amterdam: Benjamins.<dgdoi:pub-id xmlns:dgdoi="http://degruyter.com/resources/doi-from-crossref" pub-id-type="doi"><a href="https://doi.org/10.1075/aic.4.02fai" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" class="text-signal-blue hover:underline">10.1075/aic.4.02fai</a></dgdoi:pub-id>
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  4. Goźdź-Roszkowski, S. 2018. ‘Facts in Law: a comparative study of <em>fact that</em> and its phraseologies in American and Polish judicial discourse’ in Goźdź-Roszkowski, S. and Pontrandolfo, G. (eds.). <em>Phraseology in Legal and Institutional Settings. A Corpus-based Interdisciplinary Perspective</em>, pp. 143–159. London: Routledge.<dgdoi:pub-id xmlns:dgdoi="http://degruyter.com/resources/doi-from-crossref" pub-id-type="doi"><a href="https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315445724-9" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" class="text-signal-blue hover:underline">10.4324/9781315445724-9</a></dgdoi:pub-id>
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  5. Goźdź-Roszkowski, S. 2017. “Justice with an attitude?” – towards a corpus-based description of evaluative phraseology in judicial discourse’ in Pêzik, P. and Waliñski, J. (eds.) <em>Language, Corpora and Cognition</em>, pp. 107–127. Frankfurt am Main. Peter Lang.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  6. Goźdź-Roszkowski, S. 2011. <em>Patterns of Linguistic Variation in American Legal English. A Corpus-based Study</em>. Frankfurt am Main. Peter Lang.<dgdoi:pub-id xmlns:dgdoi="http://degruyter.com/resources/doi-from-crossref" pub-id-type="doi"><a href="https://doi.org/10.3726/978-3-653-00659-9" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" class="text-signal-blue hover:underline">10.3726/978-3-653-00659-9</a></dgdoi:pub-id>
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  7. Goźdź-Roszkowski, S. and Pontrandolfo, S. 2013. ‘Evaluative patterns in judicial discourse: a corpus-based phraseological perspective on American and Italian criminal judgments.’ <em>International Journal of Law, Language and Discourse</em>, vol 13, Issue 2, pp. 9–69.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  8. Macagno, F. 2016. Defining Marriage: Classification, Interpretation, and Definitional Disputes. <em>Informal Logic</em>, 36.3, pp. 309–332.<dgdoi:pub-id xmlns:dgdoi="http://degruyter.com/resources/doi-from-crossref" pub-id-type="doi"><a href="https://doi.org/10.22329/il.v36i3.4721" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" class="text-signal-blue hover:underline">10.22329/il.v36i3.4721</a></dgdoi:pub-id>
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  9. Mazzi, D. 2010. ‘This Argument Fails for Two Reasons... A Linguistic Analysis of Judicial Evaluation Strategies in US Supreme Court Judgements.’ <em>International Journal for the Semiotics of Law</em> 23 No. 4: 373–385.<dgdoi:pub-id xmlns:dgdoi="http://degruyter.com/resources/doi-from-crossref" pub-id-type="doi"><a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s11196-010-9162-0" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" class="text-signal-blue hover:underline">10.1007/s11196-010-9162-0</a></dgdoi:pub-id>
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  10. Partington, A., Duguid, A. and Taylor, C. (eds.). 2013. <em>Patterns and Meanings in Discourse. Theory and practice in corpus-assisted discourse studies (CADS)</em>. Amsterdam: John Benajmins.<dgdoi:pub-id xmlns:dgdoi="http://degruyter.com/resources/doi-from-crossref" pub-id-type="doi"><a href="https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.55" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" class="text-signal-blue hover:underline">10.1075/scl.55</a></dgdoi:pub-id>
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  11. Partington, A. 2004. ‘Corpora and Discourse: A most congruous beast’ in A. Partington, J. Morley &amp; L. Haarman (eds.) <em>Corpora and Discourse</em>., 11–20. Bern: Peter Lang.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  12. Perelman, Ch. and Olbrechts-Tyteca, L. 1969. <em>The New Rhetoric</em>. <em>A Treatise on Argumentation</em>. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  13. Rayson, Paul. 2008. ‘From key words to key semantic domains.’ <em>International Journal of Corpus Linguistics</em>. 13:(4): 519–549.<dgdoi:pub-id xmlns:dgdoi="http://degruyter.com/resources/doi-from-crossref" pub-id-type="doi"><a href="https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.13.4.06ray" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" class="text-signal-blue hover:underline">10.1075/ijcl.13.4.06ray</a></dgdoi:pub-id>
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  14. Scott, M. 2008. <em>WordSmith Tools Help Manual</em>. Version 5.0. Liverpool. Lexical Analysis Software.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  15. Thompson, G. &amp; Alba Juez L. 2014. <em>Evaluation in Context</em>. Amsterdam: John Benajmins.<dgdoi:pub-id xmlns:dgdoi="http://degruyter.com/resources/doi-from-crossref" pub-id-type="doi"><a href="https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.242" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" class="text-signal-blue hover:underline">10.1075/pbns.242</a></dgdoi:pub-id>
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  16. Thompson, G. and Hunston, S. 2000. Evaluation. An Introduction. In: Hunston, S. and Thompson, G. (eds.) <em>Evaluation in Text. Authorial Stance and the Construction of Discourse</em>. pp. 1–27. Oxford: OUP.<dgdoi:pub-id xmlns:dgdoi="http://degruyter.com/resources/doi-from-crossref" pub-id-type="doi"><a href="https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198238546.003.0001" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" class="text-signal-blue hover:underline">10.1093/oso/9780198238546.003.0001</a></dgdoi:pub-id>
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  17. Williams, R. 1995. <em>Keywords: A Vocabulary of Culture and Society</em>. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  18. Zimmerman, J. 2015. <em>Wartoœci w prawie administracyjnym</em>. [Values in Administrative Law) Warszawa: LEX. Wolters Kluwer.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/slgr-2018-0004 | Journal eISSN: 2199-6059 | Journal ISSN: 0860-150X
Journal RSS Feed
Language: English
Page range: 61 - 79
Published on: Oct 29, 2018
Published by: University of Bialystok
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 4 times per year
Keywords:
axiology,
evaluation,
judicial discourse,
corpus-assisted discourse analysis,
legal argumentation,
same-sex marriage
Related subjects:
Philosophy,
Philosophy, other

© 2018 Stanisław Goźdź-Roszkowski, published by University of Bialystok
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License.

Previous articleVolume 53 (2018): Issue 1 (March 2018)Next article