Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
|Title:||Lexical struggle in court: Aboriginal Australians versus the state||Contributor(s):||Eades, Diana (author)||Publication Date:||2006||DOI:||10.1111/j.1360-6441.2006.00323.x||Handle Link:||https://hdl.handle.net/1959.11/1392||Abstract:||This paper presents a critical sociolinguistic exploration of the cross‐examination of three young teenage Australian Aboriginal boys in a Queensland court. The boys alleged that they had been abducted by six police officers, so they were prosecution witnesses in the case against the police officers. The paper examines the lexical strategies used by defence counsel to construct these victim‐witnesses as criminals with 'no regard for the community', and to reinterpret the alleged abduction as a consensual car ride. Of greatest concern is the strategy which I term 'lexical perversion'– the rejection of a witness's labelling of their own experience, through overt correction with, or covert substitution of, another lexical item. These lexical strategies are central to the judicial legitimation of neocolonial control by the police over the movements of Aboriginal young people.||Publication Type:||Journal Article||Source of Publication:||Journal of Sociolinguistics, 10(2), p. 153-180||Publisher:||Blackwell Publishing Ltd||Place of Publication:||Oxford||ISSN:||1360-6441||Field of Research (FOR):||180119 Law and Society||Peer Reviewed:||Yes||HERDC Category Description:||C1 Refereed Article in a Scholarly Journal||Statistics to Oct 2018:||Visitors: 75
|Appears in Collections:||Journal Article|
School of Psychology and Behavioural Science
Files in This Item:
checked on Nov 26, 2018
checked on Mar 4, 2019
Items in Research UNE are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.