Part of
Corpus-based Research on Variation in English Legal Discourse
Edited by Teresa Fanego and Paula Rodríguez-Puente
[Studies in Corpus Linguistics 91] 2019
► pp. 79104
References (47)
Biber, Douglas
2009A corpus-driven approach to formulaic language in English. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 14(3): 275–311. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Biber, Douglas & Gray, Bethany
2015Grammatical Complexity in Academic English: Linguistic Change in Writing. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Biber, Douglas, Johansson, Stig, Leech, Geoffrey, Conrad, Susan & Finegan, Edward
1999Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. Harlow: Pearson Education.Google Scholar
BNC = The British National Corpus, version 3 (BNC XML Edition) 2007 Distributed by Bodleian Libraries, University of Oxford, on behalf of the BNC Consortium. [URL] (30 January 2018).
Bondi, Marina & Scott, Mike
(eds) 2010Keyness in Texts [Studies in Corpus Linguistics 41]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Breeze, Ruth
2013Lexical bundles in four legal genres. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 18(2): 229–253. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Breeze, Ruth, Gotti, Maurizio & Sancho Guinda, Carmen
(eds) 2014Interpersonality in Legal Genres. Bern: Peter Lang. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Breeze, Ruth
2017Corpora and computation in teaching law and language. International Journal of Language and Law 6: 1–17.Google Scholar
2018Giving voice to the law: Speech act verbs in legal academic writing. In Goźdź-Roszkowski & Pontrandolfo (eds), 221–239.Google Scholar
Brett, David & Pinna, Antonio
2015Patterns, fixedness and variability: Using PoS-grams to find phraseologies in the language of travel journalism. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences 198: 52–57. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brown, Penelope & Levinson, Stephen C.
1987Politeness: Some Universals in Language Use. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Buendía Castro, Miriam & Faber, Pamela
2018Online resources for phraseology-related problems in legal translation. In Goźdź-Roszkowski & Pontrandolfo (eds), 61–85.Google Scholar
Companies Act. 2006
Dobrić Basaneže, Katja
2018Extended binomial expressions in the language of contracts. In Goźdź-Roszkowski & Pontrandolfo (eds), 203–220.Google Scholar
Engberg, Jan
2014General and specific perspectives on vagueness in law: Impact upon the feasibility of legal translation. In Translating the DCFR and Drafting the CESL: A Pragmatic Perspective, Barbara Pasa & Lucia Morra (eds), 147–160. Munich: Sellier European Law Publishers. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goźdź-Roszkowski, Stanisław
2011Patterns of Linguistic Variation in American Legal English: A Corpus-Based Study. Frankfurt: Peter Lang. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goźdź-Roszkowski, Stanisław & Pontrandolfo, Gianluca
(eds) 2018Phraseology in Legal and Institutional Settings. A Corpus-based Interdisciplinary Perspective. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
Goźdź-Roszkowski, Stanisław
2018Facts in law. A comparative study of fact that and its phraseologies in American and Polish judicial discourse. In Goźdź-Roszkowski & Pontrandolfo (eds), 143–159.Google Scholar
Hiltunen, Risto
1990Chapters on Legal English. Aspects Past and Present of the Language of the Law. Helsinki: Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia.Google Scholar
Hoey, Michael, Mahlberg, Michaela, Stubbs, Michael & Teubert, Wolfgang
2007Text, Discourse and Corpora. Theory and Analysis. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Hornero, Ana María, Luzón, María José & Murillo, Silvia
(eds) 2006Corpus Linguistics: Applications for the Study of English. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Hyland, Ken
1998Boosting, hedging and the negotiation of academic knowledge. Text 18(3): 349–382. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kilgarriff, Adam, Baisa, Vít, Bušta, Jan, Jakubíček, Miloš, Kovvář, Vojtěch, Michelfeit, Jan, Rychlý, Pavel, Suchomel, Vít
2014The Sketch Engine: Ten years on. Lexicography 1: 7–36. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kopaczyk, Joanna
2018Terms and conditions. A comparative study of noun binomials in UK and Scottish legislation. In Goźdź-Roszkowski & Pontrandolfo (eds), 160–185.Google Scholar
Kruse, Otto & Chitez, Madalina
2012Contrastive genre mapping in academic contexts: An intercultural approach. Journal of Academic Writing 1(2): 59–73. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lin, Yen-Liang
2015Using key part-of-speech analysis to examine spoken discourse by Taiwanese EFL learners. ReCALL 27(3): 302–320. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Marmor, Andrei
2014The Language of Law. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mellinkoff, David
1963The Language of the Law. Boston MA: Little, Brown & Company.Google Scholar
Model Business Corporation Act
2005 Chicago, IL: American Bar Association.Google Scholar
Nesi, Hilary & Gardner, Sheena
2012Genres across the Disciplines: Student Writing in Higher Education. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Orts Llopis, María de los Ángeles
2009Legal genres in English and Spanish: Some attempts of analysis. Ibérica 18: 109–130.Google Scholar
2014Contractual commitment or obligation? The linguistic interactions in charter parties. In Breeze, Gotti & Sancho Guinda (eds), 87–111.Google Scholar
Pérez-Paredes, Pascual
2017A keyword analysis of the 2015 UK Higher Education Green Paper and the Twitter debate. In Power, Persuasion and Manipulation in Professional Discourse, María de los Ángeles Orts Llopis, Ruth Breeze & Maurizio Gotti (eds), 161–191. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Pontrandolfo, Gianluca & Goźdź-Roszkowski, Stanisław
2014Exploring the local grammar of evaluation: The case of adjectival patterns in American and Italian judicial discourse. Research in Language 12(1): 71–92. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rayson, Paul
2008From key words to key semantic domains. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 13(4): 519–549. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Salkie, Raphael
2018Legal phraseology in contrast. The fact that and its German counterparts. In Goźdź-Roszkowski & Pontrandolfo (eds), 126–142.Google Scholar
Salmi-Tolonen, Tarja
2014Interpersonality and fundamental rights. In Breeze, Gotti & Sancho Guinda (eds), 63–86.Google Scholar
Stubbs, Michael
2007On texts, corpora and models of language. In Text, Discourse and Corpora: Theory and Analysis, Michael Stubbs, Michaela Mahlberg, Michael Hoey & Wolfgang Teubert (eds), 127–162. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Swales, John
2004Research Genres: Explorations and Applications. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Szczyrbak, Magdalena
2018Verba dicendi in courtroom interaction. In Goźdź-Roszkowski & Pontrandolfo (eds), 240–257.Google Scholar
Taylor, John
1991Possessive genitives in English: A discourse perspective. South African Journal of Linguistics 9(3): 59–63. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tiersma, Peter
1999Legal Language. Chicago IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Tognini-Bonelli, Elena
2001Corpus Linguistics at Work [Studies in Corpus Linguistics 6]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Trosborg, Anna
1997Rhetorical Strategies in Legal Language. Discourse Analysis of Statutes and Contracts. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar
Williams, Christopher
2005Tradition and Change in Legal English. Bern: Peter Lang. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2013Changes in the verb phrase in legislative language in English. In The Verb Phrase in English. Investigating Recent Language Change with Corpora, Bas Aarts, Joanne Close, Geoffrey Leech & Sean Wallis (eds), 353–371. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (3)

Cited by 3 other publications

Giampieri, Patrizia
2024. Key n-Grams in EU Directives and in the UK National Legislation on Consumer Contracts. International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue internationale de Sémiotique juridique 37:1  pp. 59 ff. DOI logo
McKeown, Jamie
2022. Stancetaking in the U.S. Supreme Court’s abortion jurisprudence (1973-present): epistemic (im)probability and evidential (dis)belief. International Journal of Legal Discourse 7:2  pp. 323 ff. DOI logo
Goźdź-Roszkowski, Stanisław
2021. Corpus Linguistics in Legal Discourse. International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue internationale de Sémiotique juridique 34:5  pp. 1515 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 26 june 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.