Intersections between Law and Language: Disciplinary Concepts in Second Language Legal Literacy

Bhatia, V. K. (1989). Legislative writing: A case of neglect in EA/OLP courses. English for Specific Purposes, 8, 223-238.10.1016/0889-4906(89)90014-8Search in Google Scholar

Bruce, N. (2002). Dovetailing language and content: Teaching balanced argument in legal problem answer writing. English for Specific Purposes, 21, 321-345.10.1016/S0889-4906(01)00040-0Search in Google Scholar

Davies, M. (1987). Reading cases. The Modern Law Review, 50(4), 409-431.10.1111/j.1468-2230.1987.tb01719.xSearch in Google Scholar

Hartig, A. J. (forthcoming). Connecting language and content in English for Specific Purposes: Case studies in law. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Search in Google Scholar

Hoffman, C. (2011). Using discourse analysis methodology to teach “legal English”. International Journal of Law, Language, & Discourse, 1(2), 1-19.Search in Google Scholar

Hoffman, C., & Tyler, A. (2008). United States legal discourse: Legal English for foreign LLMs. St. Paul, MN: Thomson/West.Search in Google Scholar

Howe, P. (1993). Planning a pre-sessional course in English for academic legal purposes. In G. M. Blue (Ed.), Language, learning and success: Studying through English (pp. 148-157). London: Macmillan.Search in Google Scholar

In re George B, 279 Cal. Rptr. 388 (Cal. Ct. App. 1991)Search in Google Scholar

Lantolf, J. P., & Thorne, S. L. (2006). Sociocultural theory and the genesis of second language development. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Liebenberg, E. (2012). Using images as an effective tool to facilitate teaching legal concepts. Cahiers de l’APLIUT, XXXI(1), 44-59.10.4000/apliut.2260Search in Google Scholar

Meyer, J. H. F., & Land, R. (2006). Overcoming barriers to student understanding: Threshold concepts and troublesome knowledge. London: Routledge.10.4324/9780203966273Search in Google Scholar

Northcott, J. (2013). Legal English. In B. Paltridge & S. Starfield (Eds.), The handbook of English for specific purposes (pp. 213-226).West Sussex:Wiley- Blackwell.Search in Google Scholar

People v. Huggins, 60 Cal. Rptr. 2d 177 (Cal. Ct. App. 1997).Search in Google Scholar

People v. McElroy, 48 P. 718 (Cal. 1897).Search in Google Scholar

People v. Williams, 12 Cal. Rptr. 2d 243 (Cal. Ct. App. 1992).Search in Google Scholar

Sierocka, H. (2014). Cultural dimensions of legal discourse. Studies in Logic, Grammar, and Rhetoric, 38(51), 189-196. doi: 10.2478/slgr-2014-003910.2478/slgr-2014-0039Search in Google Scholar

Solan, L. M., & Tiersma, P. M. (Eds.). (2012). The Oxford handbook of language and law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199572120.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Swales, J. (1985). A genre-based approach to language across the curriculum. In M. L. Tickoo (Ed.), Language across the curriculum. Singapore: SEAMEO Regional Language Centre.Search in Google Scholar

Tiersma, P. M. (1999). Legal language. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Search in Google Scholar

van Compernolle, R. A. (2014). Sociocultural theory and L2 instructional pragmatics. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.10.21832/9781783091409Search in Google Scholar

White, G. (1979). The subject specialist and the ESP teacher Lexden Papers [Essays on Teaching English for Specific Purposes by the staff of the Colchester and Bedford Study Centres] (Vol. 2, pp. 9-14). Oxford: Lexden Centre.Search in Google Scholar