International Association of Forensic Linguists 
7th Biennial Conference on Forensic Linguistics/Language and Law 
1st ~ 4th July 2005
University of Washington
Cardiff University, Cardiff, Wales, UK

Special Thematic Symposia

The conference will include three special symposia, on the following topics:

Studies in Forensic Linguistics for Pre-Law Students
(Coordinator: William G. Eggington)

Plain Language and Transparent Legal System for Lay People
(Coordinator: Mami Hiraike Okawara)

Language analysis in Asylum Cases: Defining a New Branch of Forensic Linguistics
(Coordinator: Maaike Verrips)

SYMPOSIUM ONE

Title: Studies in Forensic Linguistics for Pre-Law Students

Presenters: 

Dr. William G. Eggington (as coordinator) with the following undergraduate students: Diane Argyle, Trent Bowen, Tara Leithead, Marcy Upp, Elizabeth Swenson, Tiffany Oaks, Kwai Ying Law, Matthew Allen, Rebecca Wright, Lisa Hoskisson, Lyndsey Nay, Kate Finlinson

Affiliation of presenters: Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah, U.S.A.

Background:

At the opening plenary of the 6th International Conference on Language and the Law, Australian High Court Justice Jack Goldring stressed the importance of studying the relationships between the legal profession and linguistics. He strongly advocated for the study of linguistics as a precursor to the study of law and suggested that many pre-law and current law students should be in attendance at the conference. Subsequently, at the commencement of a recent Senior Seminar Forensic Linguistics class taught at Brigham Young University, I challenged students to apply their linguistics knowledge to the legal field to a qualitative degree that would be worthy of consideration at the next IAFL conference. I shared the 2003 conference abstracts with the students as well as various forensic linguistics journals and other texts, divided the students into workable groups and asked them to develop research projects abstracts/proposals which could be submitted to the conference organizers. As the semester progressed, it became obvious that the 11 students (most of whom are intending to apply for law school) were highly motivated to produce quality work. Their completed assignments stand as three quality preliminary studies that could developed into complete studies worthy of presentation at the IAFL conference. I then applied for funding to mentor these students in the coming semester toward developing these studies into papers that can be delivered at the conference. I am confident that sufficient funding will be available for the students to complete these projects and to cover the costs of travel to the 2005 IAFL conference.

This thematic unit will consist of an initial overview (presented by Dr. William Eggington) of an undergraduate class in forensic linguistics with a special emphasis on task-based learning where the tasks assigned to groups were to develop research projects of a quality worthy of presentation at the IAFL conference. At the conclusion of the overview, student groups will present their group projects which consist of: 

Group 1: Diane Argyle, Trent Bowen, Tara Leithead, Marcy Upp

Title: Questionable Objections and Objectionable Questions. 

A standard in all court proceedings is objections called by the opposing lawyer. One common objection involves leading the witness. This project examines those questions that were objected to as leading the witness to determine if there is a linguistic difference between those that were sustained and those that were overruled. Using Gibbons’ (2003) linguistic analysis of control in court questioning as a foundation, students analyzed leading questions in the OJ Simpson case. Their results indicated a series of successful “leading” strategies. These preliminary findings were then applied to at five other cases presided over by different judges to see if there are linguistic commonalities in acceptable and non-acceptable leading questions. 

Group 2: Elizabeth Swenson, Tiffany Oaks, Kwai Ying Law, Kate Finlinson

Title: Supreme Court, Supreme Lexicographer?

This study examines the ways that U.S. Supreme Court decisions tend to constantly define and redefine the semantics of key words across the history of the U.S. Using Semantic Feature Analysis, an established method for determining meaning, students analyzed the evolution of the word “commerce” from its constitutional meaning to its meaning in recent court decision. They found that the meaning both broadened and narrowed depending upon particular court decisions, and that the “legal” meaning of the word had gradually moved away from general social meanings. Students then applied the same methodology to other key words such as “regulate” and “rights”.

Group 3: Matthew Allen, Diane Argyle, Lisa Hoskisson, Lyndsey Nay, Rebecca Wright

Title: Consideration of Primary and Secondary Audiences as Applied to American Indian Treaties.

This study examines the relationship between legal language complexity and its intended audiences in terms of the primary audience (legal officials) and secondary audience (American Indian leaders and the general community) with respect to comprehension of treaties and agreements with the Cherokee nation from 1795 to 1905. Using established corpus linguistic techniques, the treaties were analyzed quantitatively in terms of linguistic density and complexity. Using qualitative techniques, the same treaties were analyzed in terms of their semantic and pragmatic associations. Both analyses revealed that the degree of complexity increased over time and that the secondary audience (American Indians, most of whom were illiterate, as revealed by their “marks” being used as signatures) would have been incapable of comprehending treaty documents whose average sentence length was 80 words, and whose average readability ratings were in excess of college education. 

SYMPOSIUM TWO

Title: Plain Language and Transparent Legal System for Lay People

Chair/Discussant: Mami Hiraike Okawara

1) Linguistic Legal Model: A Model for an Understanding of the Discrepancy of Participation between Lay People and Legal Experts

Mami Hiraike Okawara (Takasaki City University of Economics)

This paper provides a model to foresee some potential problems of lay participation in the current on-going justice system reform in Japan. In order to achieve the popular base of the justice system, a new lay-participation system, Saibanin-seido (civil judge system), is to be introduced in criminal proceedings in 2009. In this system Japanese lay judges will serve a term of only one case; however, they will deliberate and decide the case together with professional judge(s). As the deliberation body will generally consist of three professional judges and six lay judges, the actual and active participation of civil judges may be difficult to achieve. The model called Linguistic Legal Model, which is a combination of Layer Analysis and Register Analysis, is intended to explain the discrepancy between legal experts and lay people. Layer Analysis frames a theatre-type concept to gain different types of perception affected by a variety of norms of differing layers. Register Analysis aims to identify linguistic characteristics of one legal genre, judgment paper. Layer Analysis elucidates the structure of law and society, whereas Register Analysis examines the structure of legal language. The model is like a two-wheeled vehicle of Layer and Register Analyses, in which the two wheels are indispensable for the operation of the vehicle. With the movement of the two wheels Linguistic Legal Model can illuminate the complex interaction among law, language, and society.

2) An experimental study on effects of "legalese" for comprehensibility of jury instructions

Masahiro Fujita (Graduate School of Policy Studies, National Graduate Institute for Policy Studies)

Yukio Itsukushima (Graduate School of Letters, Nihon University)

As Japanese Diet approved the bills concerning lay participation in criminal judicial decision making in May 2004, how do lay persons understand legal instructions and descriptions of the facts of legal cases which are described in so-called "legalese" is one of the questions of growing concern in recent Japan. In the context of psychological studies on jurors' behaviours, a line of academic efforts are devoted to jurors’ capacity of understanding legal instructions and/or documentation. For example, Severance, Greene, & Loftus (1984) examined the effects of patterns of judicial instructions. They reported the forms of instructions do affect jurors’ understandings of legal concept and their decision making. Also, Wiener, Pritchard, & Weston (1995) found that revision of the instructions made little improvement on jurors’ understandings and that miscomprehension strongly related with willingness to impose the death penalty. In our study, focusing on the effects of using “legalese”, we examine effects of "legalese" on intelligibility and accuracy of memory with the methods of psychological experiment. ?In the experiment, we present some forms of descriptions of concise summary of a legal case and judicial instructions to participants. We prepare three conditions in the experiment: a) presenting in comprehensive words condition, b) presenting in "legalese" with comprehensive explanation condition, and c) presenting in only "legalese" condition. The participants are Japanese university students who are awarded course credits with participating (or who voluntarily participate) in the experiment. In our presentation, we present the results of the experiment and discuss the effects of using "legalese".

Severance, L.J., Greene, E., & Loftus, E.F. (1984) Toward criminal jury instructions that jurors can understand. Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology, 75, 198-233.
Wiener, R.L., Pritchard, C.C., & Weston, M. (1995) Comprehensibility of approved jury instructions in capital murder cases. Journal of Applied Psychology, 80, 455-467.

3) Towards more objective criteria for decisions on similarities in trademark disputes: What linguistics analysis may contribute

Sachiko Shudo (Waseda University) 

In trademark disputes in which the main issue is on the similarity between two marks, it is difficult to make the legal decision absolutely objective considering the notion of similarity inherently involves a subjective judgment. In this paper, I will report a Japanese trademark case, in which the lower courts ruled that two marks were not similar on the respective analyses of the appearance, notion, and sound of the marks. The decisions were overturned by the Supreme Court, which analyzed the similarity from the overall impression of the marks. The problem is that, while the judgment of similarity from the overall impression closely reflects the expected judgment of the general public, the explanation tends to be subjective. While the decisions by the lower courts do not reflect the general public view, the explanations are seemingly more objective because the lower courts considered the following aspects of each mark, appearance, notion and sound, and compared the marks aspect by aspect. Needless to say, what is important about the similarity judgment in a trademark dispute is that the judgment should reflect the expected judgment of the general public who are subject to the confusion caused by the similarity. Then, the question is: how can the judgment from the overall impression be supported by objective explanation? In the Japanese case, linguistic analysis provides the answer. I will show how the overall decision, which may seem subjective, is actually justified on the basis of linguistic analysis.

SYMPOSIUM THREE

Title: LANGUAGE ANALYSIS IN ASYLUM CASES: DEFINING A NEW BRANCH OF FORENSIC LINGUISTICS 

Coordinator: dr. Maaike Verrips, de Taalstudio

Participants and Structure 

Welcome: defining a new branch of forensic linguistics 
Maaike Verrips, de Taalstudio 

Forensic linguistics and language analysis in asylum seeker cases: The development of Guidelines by an international group of linguists
Diana Eades, University of New England 

LINGUA - More than guidelines
Eric Baltisberger, LINGUA 

On the collection of ‘useful and reliable data’
Maaike Verrips & Suzanne Dikker, de Taalstudio 

Problems, prospects and perspectives on language analysis in UK refugee status determination
Peter L Patrick, University of Essex, & Nick Oakeshott, Refugee Legal Centre

The use of spontaneous or elicited loanwords in determining national origin/socialization in cases of languages spoken in more than one country: a procedure
Dieke Rietkerk, freelance language analyst 

The significance of Sudan for forensic linguistics
Al-Amin Abu-Manga, University of Khartoum 

Discussion

[Alternate paper: Supplementing the Language Analyst’s Intuitions with Empirical Consultation Work on Acceptability, Oscar Nkulu, freelance linguist]

Abstracts

1. Welcome: Defining a new branch of forensic linguistics

Presenter: Maaike Verrips, de Taalstudio

A number of governments use Language Analysis as a source of information about the nationality and identity of asylum applicants. In a motion passed unanimously at the IAFL biannual meeting in 2003, grave concern was expressed about the lack of professionalism and reliability of language analyses used by the Australian government (and others). In June 2004, the Language and National Origin Group released Guidelines on the use and interpretation of language analysis in relation to asylum (www.iafl.org). The Guidelines are an important step towards professional development of this type of linguistic analysis, but in themselves they don’t constitute reliable linguistic criteria and methods for judging country of origin in asylum cases. By organising this symposium we hope to contribute to developing such methods and criteria. 

2. Forensic linguistics and language analysis in asylum seeker cases: the development of Guidelines by an international group of linguists

Presenter: Diana Eades, University of New England, Australia

While most forensic linguistics to date has been in areas of criminal or civil law, recent work has extended to immigration law, most particularly in examining the role of language in determination of national origin of asylum seekers. When asylum seekers flee persecution or war in their home countries, they often arrive in a new country seeking asylum, without documentation that can prove their nationality. They are thus open to the accusation that they are not actually fleeing persecution and/or war, but they are from another country and they are merely seeking ‘a better life’. If so, they do not qualify for refugee status. In order to test nationality claims in such situations, a number of governments are using ‘language analysis’, based on the assumption that the way that a person speaks contains clues about their origins. While linguists would not dispute this assumption, they are disputing a number of other assumptions, as well as practices, involved in this form of linguistic identification. This paper presents recent developments in this area of forensic linguistics, focusing specifically on the release of Guidelines by a group of linguists concerning the use of language analysis in such asylum seeker cases. It concludes with discussion of the role of forensic linguistics in questions of national origin.

3. LINGUA – More than guidelines

Presenter: Eric Baltisberger
LINGUA within the Swiss Federal Office for Refugees (from 1st January 2005: Swiss Federal Office for Migration)

Linguistic analyses have been used within the Swiss asylum procedure since 1997. At the Swiss Federal Office for Migration (FOM), the scientific unit LINGUA is in charge of carrying out such analyses for asylum seekers whose allegations concerning their country/region of provenance are doubtful. The Swiss appeal board recognizes the validity of these analyses and has defined the conditions for their usage as well as the necessary quality standards. A precise legal frame has been set and is strictly followed by LINGUA as well as by the Swiss asylum authorities in general. In order to carry out its analyses, LINGUA hires independent experts who not only have the necessary linguistic qualifications, but who also have a very good knowledge of the countries/regions involved in their analyses. In fact, a combination of linguistic and of country-knowledge analyses - which reflects the inextricable link between language and socio-cultural background - allows to increase the accuracy of the results. The independent experts themselves usually lead the interviews with the asylum seekers so that the relevant questions can be asked. The goal of a “LINGUA expert” is that of establishing a person’s main socialization, NOT his/her citizenship. The guidelines which have recently been published by the IAFL reflect the quality criteria LINGUA has set to itself and has been using for many years. Nevertheless, other questions concerning the use of linguistic analyses within the domain of asylum still remain open. LINGUA tries to consider them all, but in order to achieve proper scientific results cooperation with the academic world remains an important necessity. It is encouraging to see that part of that world has decided to contribute their expertise to our field of work!

4. On the collection of ‘Useful and reliable data’

Presenters: Maaike Verrips & Suzanne Dikker, de Taalstudio

Guideline #5 of the “Guidelines for the Use of Language Analysis” (June 2004) states that ‘Language Analysis requires useful and reliable data’. In this presentation, we will discuss the notion of ‘reliable and useful data’. A set of requirements for the collection of such data will be identified, ranging from the audio quality of the recording to the content of the interview. On the basis of cases involving applicants from various countries, we will argue that in order to collect ‘useful and reliable data’ for a particular case, a number of interacting factors needs to be taken into account. Some of these factors relate to the applicant’s background, e.g. the native language(s) of the applicant, and the culture s/he originates from. A second set of factors involves the linguistic as well as non-linguistic interaction during the interview. Thirdly the nature of the doubt of the Immigration Office plays an important role: does the IO question the nationality of the applicant or his/her regional, cultural or tribal background? Some important generalisations can be made about optimising the collecting of the relevant linguistic data. Nevertheless, we believe that given the heterogeneity in the background of the asylum cases in which language analysis is used, the nature of the required data should be defined on a case by case basis. From this it follows that data-collection is a crucial phase of each language analysis individually. We will argue that, therefore, the language analyst should supervise the data-collection him/herself.

5 Problems, prospects and perspectives on language analysis in UK refugee status determination

Presenters: Peter L Patrick and Nick Oakeshott
University of Essex; Refugee Legal Centre (respectively)

The authors (a linguist and a lawyer) briefly survey the status of refugee applications for asylum in the UK over the last several years, noting: the countries which are the sources of most applicants; some inferences about the main languages involved; the legal basis for the introduction of language analysis; the political atmosphere surrounding refugee issues, and the increasing pressure on the process of refugee status determination. We spell out the importance of nationality in the process, and highlight the contrasting view of linguists that the appropriate subject of language experts’ testimony is evidence of language socialisation (Language and National Origin Group, 2004). Methods used in the administrative tribunals for determining nationality are noted (documentation, background evidence, questioning, narrative credibility/cohesion, as well as language analysis). Parallels and contrasts with the experience of general forensic linguists in the courts are described, including issues of transparency, credentialling, experts’ duties, timing of involvement, and differences in procedures. Finally, we identify a number of linguistic issues arising, illustrating where possible with elements from actual cases. Some issues require initial or further research by linguists, others principally require clarification of linguists’ views directed to non-linguists involved in refugee status determination. Some suggestions are given for appropriate participation of linguists and other language professionals in the process of refugee status determination.

Reference
Language & National Origin Group. 2004. “Guidelines for the use of Language Analysis in relation to questions of national origin in refugee cases.” 

6. The use of spontaneous and/or elicited loanwords in determining national origin/socialization in cases of languages spoken in more than one country: a procedure" .

Presenter: Dieke Rietkerk
Freelance linguist 

This paper addresses the questions involved in the use of loanwords in determining national origin or socialisation in cases of languages spoken in more than one country. Examples will be taken from cases involving Sierra Leone Fula (with loanwords from Krio and/or French) and Burundi Swahili (with French loanwords). The main research question in the consideration of these examples is as follows: is determination of national origin or socialisation at all possible in these cases, and if yes, what should the procedure be? When carrying out a language analysis in such cases, as a source of linguistic information I focus on both loanwords in spontaneous speech (on tape and from my own research session with the client), as well as elicited loanwords. I will present my method of elicitation, which is not very different from the general method to elicit word lists in the initial stages of linguistic fieldwork. I will discuss the following considerations that play a role in my elicitation method: The use of a tape or not; the use of spontaneous speech and/or elicited speech; the use of pictures; the choice of an intermediate language; the choice of vocabulary: from a Swadesh' word list-or not?; taping the whole session or just the relevant data; how to get loanwords without leading the client on. In the analysis of the collected data, an important question is what to do if the data seem to be conflictive in nature (eg both French and Krio loanwords). Provided that all the considerations above are accurately dealt with, is it possible to identify the origin of a speaker of a language that is spoken in more than one country, on the basis of the use of loanwords? 

7. The Significance of Sudan for Forensic Linguistics

Presenter: Al-Amin Abu-Manga
University of Khartoum

A number of linguistic, geo-political and political factors combine to make the Sudan a quite significant country for specialists in Forensic Linguistics. These are, inter alia:

a. A large number of languages (ca. 150), belonging to three out of the four language families of Africa (Greenberg's classification).
b. High rates of language shift to Arabic among the non-Arab ethnic groups.
c. Wide spread of Khartoum variety of Arabic due to displacement and migration from war zones to Central Sudan.
d. Nine neighbouring countries with shared ethnic and linguistic characteristics in the border areas.
e. A twenty-year long civil war in the South and the Nuba Mountains and a recent, but severe, war in Darfur.

The last factor compelled thousands of Sudanese citizens to seek asylum in different European and American countries; a considerable number of these are actually not from the war zones and some of them are even not Sudanese. The other factors, on the other hand, harden the task of the language analyst in his effort to establish the genuineness and falseness of an asylum seeker claiming to originate from a war zone in the Sudan.

Relying on the previously analysed cases by the author, this paper attempts to:

i) elaborate on the above factors and issues,
ii) discern the linguistic clues which can help in reaching to more convincing conclusions in the case of Sudan,
iii) advise government interviewers on the kind of data they are supposed to record from the subjects concerned.

Alternate presenter:

Supplementing the Language Analyst’s Intuitions with Empirical Consultation Work on Acceptability

Presenter: Oscar Nkulu
UNHCR, freelance language analyst

Blind reliance on the investigator’s intuitions or native speakerness in language analysis can be misleading. While recognising their value, the presentation advocates supplementing them with empirical search that may help reduce possible gaps between the researcher’s native intuitions and the intuitions of speakers whose language is being probed, particularly in contexts where language change runs freely, unimpeded say by standard norms, and where the researcher and the producer of the language being investigated belong to different generations. Considering that language analysis is generally carried out in the absence of the speaker, the presentation further argues for extending the investigation to people with similar characteristics to and in the same age range as those whose language is under scrutiny whilst highlighting the necessity for the language analyst to obligatorily engage in actual consultations on acceptability with the speaker’s contemporaries. It is hoped that investigations carried out in the observance of these requirements will help avoid researcher’s glibness and consolidate the language analyst’s methodology, thus making of language analysis a branch of forensic linguistics in its own right.