Mediation vs. Litigation
What are the characteristics and constraints of courtroom language? To what extent can mediation provide an alternative to these constraints? Use some examples to illustrate your points.
Introduction
Litigation is defined as the process of contesting a legal action in court (Collins Dictionaries 2011). The process of taking legal action involves the usage of language. Ordinary everyday language is adapted in many ways to form a sublanguage of legal language (Tiersma 2008). This is also known as legalese (Post 2015). Legalese is used in all aspects regarding the law and thus is used in court and by all court participants (Conley and O'Barr 2005). More often than not, some participants are not fluent in legalese and …show more content…
There exist in courts rules of evidence and rules of hearsay and so forth. Some things about each disputing side of the story cannot be presented in court due to these rules (Eades 2010). This is a constraint to which mediation can prove to be an alternative. Mediation is a constructed dialogue between the disputing parties with free quoting. In which each disputing party is free to tell their side of the story as they see it (Eades 2010). The mediator would direct the session towards a resolution of the dispute (Eades 2010). Thus there are no variations amongst witnesses and their testimonies, but rather moderated arguments with accusations and counteraccusations (Conley and O'Barr …show more content…
Tiersma (2008) had noted that there exist differences between written legalese and verbal legalese. These are further placed in genres of codified and dynamic legalese (Post 2015). Each genre consists of characteristics that identify each type of legalese and where and how they are used. In litigation both is used extensively not only by lawyers but by other law related professionals including police officers, clerks and interpreters (Post 2015). It is crucial to understand that many disputing parties, witnesses and interpreters are overwhelmed by legalese and many times their rights are limited and/or ignored in the process of litigations (Conely 2005). For example, Eades (2006) has explained that whereas witnesses have a right to interpreter, accused parties do not. Thus is it quite hopeless for non-speakers of legalese with limited grasps of ordinary English accused of a crime. Another example of this is linguistic tactics of smuggling information and framing questions described by Aldridge and Luchjenbroers (2007) which clearly depicts the limitations of the rights of the witnesses and accused in litigation and vulnerability. It is also evident amongst other scholarly papers such as Eades in Interviewing and Examining
What are the characteristics and constraints of courtroom language? To what extent can mediation provide an alternative to these constraints? Use some examples to illustrate your points.
Introduction
Litigation is defined as the process of contesting a legal action in court (Collins Dictionaries 2011). The process of taking legal action involves the usage of language. Ordinary everyday language is adapted in many ways to form a sublanguage of legal language (Tiersma 2008). This is also known as legalese (Post 2015). Legalese is used in all aspects regarding the law and thus is used in court and by all court participants (Conley and O'Barr 2005). More often than not, some participants are not fluent in legalese and …show more content…
There exist in courts rules of evidence and rules of hearsay and so forth. Some things about each disputing side of the story cannot be presented in court due to these rules (Eades 2010). This is a constraint to which mediation can prove to be an alternative. Mediation is a constructed dialogue between the disputing parties with free quoting. In which each disputing party is free to tell their side of the story as they see it (Eades 2010). The mediator would direct the session towards a resolution of the dispute (Eades 2010). Thus there are no variations amongst witnesses and their testimonies, but rather moderated arguments with accusations and counteraccusations (Conley and O'Barr …show more content…
Tiersma (2008) had noted that there exist differences between written legalese and verbal legalese. These are further placed in genres of codified and dynamic legalese (Post 2015). Each genre consists of characteristics that identify each type of legalese and where and how they are used. In litigation both is used extensively not only by lawyers but by other law related professionals including police officers, clerks and interpreters (Post 2015). It is crucial to understand that many disputing parties, witnesses and interpreters are overwhelmed by legalese and many times their rights are limited and/or ignored in the process of litigations (Conely 2005). For example, Eades (2006) has explained that whereas witnesses have a right to interpreter, accused parties do not. Thus is it quite hopeless for non-speakers of legalese with limited grasps of ordinary English accused of a crime. Another example of this is linguistic tactics of smuggling information and framing questions described by Aldridge and Luchjenbroers (2007) which clearly depicts the limitations of the rights of the witnesses and accused in litigation and vulnerability. It is also evident amongst other scholarly papers such as Eades in Interviewing and Examining