The law review paper between the Kingdom of the law and the realms of academia: A systemic functional analysis of adverbial clauses
Vol.15,No.1(2022)
Legal discourse has long been classified among those genres that defy generic changes the most (Gocić 2012). Recently, however, hybrid legal genres have been challenging this generic stability by imposing their own norms to coin a novel kind of ‘legal culture’ (Goźdź-Roszkowski 2011: 11). The law review article is a case in point for it combines both legal and academic standards of writing which make it “far richer in intertextuality and interdiscursivity” (Bhatia 2006: 6) than the traditional set of legal genres. This generic subversion can be traced in the lexico-grammatical choices made by the authors to turn their papers into influential legal sources rather than mere descriptions of the law. In this context, this study aspires to scrutinize the use of adverbial clauses as one specific lexico-grammatical choice in a corpus of 44 accredited law review papers with the aim of showing how this hybrid genre strives to evolve beyond the stagnation of what is termed ‘language of the law’. Specifically, a Systemic Functional Linguistics analysis of the semantic, structural and thematic uses of these structures is conducted to demonstrate how the hybridity of contexts in a single genre can make for unprecedented generic breaches. The quantitative and qualitative analyses revealed an uneven distribution of adverbial patterns in favor of non-finite purpose and finite condition, concession and reason clauses. Additionally, the positional distribution of these patterns is manipulated whenever the need arises to hedge claims as a form of allegiance to the communal demands of the law and academia. These choices are found to comply with the authors’ needs to balance both legal and academic rituals of writing while observing at the same time their personal needs to be highly acclaimed as legal scholars and to “publish or perish” (Christensen & Oseid 2008: 1).
Legal genres; generic stability; law review article; adverbial clauses; lexico-grammatical choices
Najla Fki
The Higher Institute of Applied Studies in the Humanities of Mahdia
Najla Fki is Assistant Professor of English Linguistics at the Higher Institute of Applied Studies in the Humanities of Mahdia, Tunisia. She is a board member of the Systemic Functional Linguistics Association of Tunisia (SYFLAT). Her main research interests include corpus linguistics, systemic functional linguistics,
genre analysis and academic discourse.
Aull, L. and Lancaster, Z. (2014) ‘Linguistic markers of stance in early and advanced academic writing: A corpus-based comparison.’ Written Communication 31(2), 151-183. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088314527055.
Balgos, A. R. G. (2017) ‘Argumentation in legal discourse: A contrastive analysis of concession in Philippine and American Supreme Court decisions.’ Asian Journal of English Language Studies 5, 71-89.
Bhatia, V. K. (1993) Analysing Genre: Language Use in Professional Settings. London: Longman.
Bhatia, V. K. (2006) ‘Legal genres.’ In: Brown, K. (ed.) Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics. Boston: Elsevier. 1-7.
Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S. and Finegan, E. (1999) Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. London: Pearson Education Limited.
Biber, D., Conrad, S. and Leech, G. (2002) Longman Student Grammar of Spoken and Written English. London: Pearson Education Limited.
Bradford, C. S. (1994) ‘As I lay writing: How to write law review articles for fun and profit: A law-and-economics, critical, hermeneutical, policy approach and lots of other stuff that thousands of readers will find really interesting and therefore you ought to publish in your prestigious, top-ten, totally excellent law review.’ Journal of Legal Education 44(1), 13-34.
Breeze, R. (2009) ‘Issues of persuasion in academic law abstracts.’ Revista Alicantina de Estudios Ingleses 22, 11-26. https://doi.org/10.14198/raei.2009.22.02
Breeze, R. (2011) ‘Disciplinary values in legal discourse: A corpus study.’ Ibérica 21, 93-116.
Candlin, C. N., Bhatia, V. K. and Jensen, C. H. (2002) ‘Developing legal writing materials for English second language learners: Problems and perspectives.’ English for Specific Purposes 21, 299-320.
Christensen, L. M. and Oseid, J. A. (2008) ‘Navigating the law review article selection process: An empirical study of those with all the power – student editors.’ South Carolina Law Review 59, 1-41.
Claridge, C. and Walker, T. (2018) ‘Causal clauses in written and speech-related genres in Early Modern English.’ ICAME Journal 25, 31-63.
Delgado, R. (1986) ‘How to write a law review article.’ University of San Francisco Law Review 20(445), 445-454.
Downing, A. (2015) English Grammar: A University Course. 3rd ed. New York: Routledge.
Febrero, J. L. S. (2003) Legal English and Translation: Theory and Practice. Annotated Texts and Documents. Alicante: Editorial Club Universitario.
Ford, C. and Thompson, S. (1986) ‘Conditionals in discourse: A text-based study from English.’ In: Traugott, E., Ter Meulen, A., Reilly, S. J. and Ferguson, C. A. (eds) On Conditionals. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 353-372.
Freddi, M. (2013) ‘Choice and language variation: Some theoretical reflections.’ In: Fontaine, L., Bartlett, T. and O’Grady, G. (eds) Systemic Functional Linguistics: Exploring Choice. New York: Cambridge University Press. 56-71.
Gadbin-George, G. (2010) ‘The Woolf reform of civil procedure: A possible end to legalese?’ LSP Journal 1(2), 41-49.
Gocić, M. S. (2012) ‘Cohesive devices in legal discourse.’ Linguistics and Literature 10(2), 89-98.
Goźdź-Roszkowski, S. (2011) ‘Patterns of linguistic variation in American legal English: A corpus-based study.’ Lodz Studies in Language 22, 11-25.
Greenwood, C. (2008) ‘Sources of international law: An introduction.’ Online document. Retrieved on 11 December 2018 <http://legal.un.org/avl/pdf/ls/greenwood_outline.pdf>.
Haegeman, L. (2004) ‘The syntax of adverbial clauses and its consequences for topicalisation.’ In: Coene, M., Cuyper, G. and d’Hulst, Y. (eds) Current Studies in Comparative Romance Linguistics. Antwerp: University of Antwerp. 61-90.
Halliday, M. A. K. and Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. (2014) Halliday’s Introduction to Functional Grammar. London and New York: Routledge.
Hyland, K. (2004) Disciplinary Discourses: Social Interactions in Academic Writing. The University of Michigan Press.
Hyland, K. (2008) ‘Persuasion, interaction and the construction of knowledge: Representing self and others in research writing.’ International Journal of English Studies 8(2), 1-23.
Kimble, J. (2013) ‘Tips for better writing in law reviews (and other journals).’ Thomas M. Cooley Law Review 30(2), 197-201.
Lavid, J. (1998) ‘Discourse functions of conditionals in multilingual instructions: A corpus study on ordering variants.’ Papers and Studies in Contrastive Linguistics 34, 285-301.
Lebovits, G. (2006) ‘Academic legal writing: How to write and publish.’ New York State Bar Association Journal 78(1), 50-54.
Lee, C.-B. (2001) ‘The information status of English if-clauses in natural discourse.’ Language Research 37(3), 483-505.
Lehto, A. (2012) ‘Development of subordination in Early Modern English legal discourse.’ In: Groom, M. and Mason, O. (eds) Proceedings of the Corpus Linguistics 2011 Conference. Birmingham, July 2011. Online document. Retrieved on 18 October 2018 <http://www.birmingham.ac.uk/documents/college-artslaw/corpus/conference-archives/2011/Paper-176.pdf>.
Lisina, N. (2013) Stylistic Features of Legal Discourse: A Comparative Study of English and Norwegian Legal Vocabulary. Unpublished MA thesis. Oslo: University of Oslo.
Maci, S. (2012) ‘Tourism as a specialised discourse: The case of normative guidelines in the European Union.’ Token: A Journal of English Linguistics 1, 37-58.
O’Donnell, M. (2008) ‘The UAM CorpusTool: Software for corpus annotation and exploration.’ In: Proceedings of the XXVI Congreso de AESLA. Almeria, Spain, April 2008. Online document. Retrieved on 20 November 2018 < https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.159.7393&rep=rep1&type=pdf>.
Orts Llopis, M. A. (2009) ‘Legal genres: Differences between their configuration, interpretation and translation in Legal English and Legal Spanish.’ In: Law and Society Meeting Conference. Denver, Colorado, May 2009. Online document. Retrieved on 13 October 2018 < https://www.researchgate.net/publication/308792412_Dealing_with_Legal_Discourse_in_English_and_Spanish_Contrasts_and_Similarities_of_Legalese_in_Two_Languages>.
Osbeck, M. K. (2012) ‘What is “good legal writing” and why does it matter?’ Drexel Law Review 4, 417-467.
Ripple, K. F. (2000) ‘The role of the law review in the tradition of judicial scholarship.’ New York University Annual Survey of American Law 57, 429-444.
Salmi-Tolonen, T. (2005) ‘Persuasion in judicial argumentation: The opinions of the advocates general at the European court of justice.’ In: Halmari, H. and Virtanen, T. (eds) Persuasion across Genres. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 59-102
Sellami-Baklouti, A. (2014) ‘Deviation of deviant themes from a probabilistic model: Thematic choice in enhancing hypotactic clause complexes.’ In: Guirat, M. and Triki, M. (eds) Deviation(s): Proceedings of the English Department & the LAD International Conference. Sfax: Imprimerie Reluire d’Art. 103-130.
Simon-Vandenbergen, A. M., Taverniers, M. and Ravelli, J. R. (eds) (2003) Grammatical Metaphor: Views from Systemic Functional Linguistics. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Swales, M. J. (2004) Research Genres: Explorations and Applications. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Szczyrbak, M. (2009) ‘Genre-based analysis of the realisation of concession in judicial discourse.’ Studia Linguistica 126, 127-148.
Tepper, P. R. (2008) Basic Legal Writing for Paralegals. 2nd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill/Irwin.
Tessuto, G. (2012) Investigating English Legal Genres in Academic and Professional Contexts. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
Thompson, S. A. (1985) ‘Grammar and written discourse: Initial vs. final purpose clauses in English.’ Text 5(1-2), 55-84.
Tiersma, P. M. (1999) Legal Language. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Tse, P. and Hyland, K. (2010) ‘Claiming a territory: Relative clauses in journal descriptions.’ Journal of Pragmatics 42, 1880-1889.
Vass, H. (2004) ‘Socio-cognitive aspects of hedging in two legal discourse genres.’ Ibérica 7, 125-141.
Visconti, J. (2000) ‘A comparative glossary of conditionals in legal language: English, Italian, German, French.’ Marie Curie Fellowships Annals 1, 81-86.
Volokh, E. (2010) Academic Legal Writing: Law Review Articles, Student Notes, Seminar Papers, and Getting on Law Review. 4th ed. New York: Foundation Press.
Wiechmann, D. and Kerz, E. (2013) ‘The positioning of concessive adverbial clauses in English: Assessing the importance of discourse-pragmatic and processing-based constraints.’ English Language and Linguistics 17(1), 1-23.
Williams, C. (2011) ‘Legal English and plain language: An update.’ ESP Across Cultures 2, 139-151.
Wiredu, J. F. (2016) ‘The complex sentence in legal English: A study of law reports.’ Journal of Literature, Languages and Linguistics 22, 29-41.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Copyright © 2022 Najla Fki