This investigation examines the discursive history and contemporary courtroom discourse of expert witnesses in Anglo-American courts, incorporating the methods of Michel Foucault into a Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) framework. The history of experts is marked by a profound discontinuity in the role of experts, during the late medieval period, with experts relegated to a witness role instead of a juror role - that of the privately knowledgeable investigator - they previously held. Examination of the discourse of contemporary experts in three high-profile US trials documents a different witness status for experts along three parameters: amplification of question responses; the use of the contrastive discourse marker well to express professional disagreement with their interlocutors; and the embedding of professional practices into so clauses. These parameters stand in sharp contrast to ordinary witness discourse. The study concludes with a discussion of the stakes in legal control of expert witnesses including asymmetrical access to experts by economic status, the possible suppression of some expert testimony by recent US Supreme Court decisions, and the hierarchicalization of expert knowledge.
Ashton, Jeffrey Lee (1988-) `Foundation for DNA Fingerprint Evidence', Proof of Facts 8, POF 749: 749-823.
2.
Berk-Seligson, Susan (1990) The Bilingual Courtroom: Court Interpreters in the Judicial Process. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
3.
Blackstone, William (1979[1768]) Commentaries on the Law of England. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
4.
Bledstein, Burton (1978) The Culture of Professionalism: The Middle Class and the Development of Higher Education in the United States. New York: Norton.
5.
Blum, Andrew (1989) `Experts: How Good Are They?', National Law Journal1, 24 July.
6.
Bruck, Maggie (1998) `The Trials and Tribulations of a Novice Expert Witness', in Stephen J. Ceci and Helene Hembrooke (eds) Expert Witnesses in Child Abuse Cases: What Can and Should Be Said in Court, pp. 85-104. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
7.
Chafe, Wallace and Danielewicz, Jane (1987) `Properties of Spoken and Written Language', in Rosalind Horowitz and S. Jay Samuels (eds) Comprehending Oral and Written Language, pp. 83-113. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
8.
Champagne, Anthony , Shuman, Daniel and Whitaker, Elizabeth (1992) `Expert Witnesses in the Courts: An Empirical Examination', Judicature76(1): 5-10.
9.
Conley, John M. and O'Barr, William M. (1990) Rules versus Relationships: The Ethnography of Legal Discourse. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
10.
Conley, John M. and O'Barr, William M. (1998) Just Words: Law, Language, and Power. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
11.
Danet, Brenda , Hoffman, Kenneth B., Kermish, Nicole C., Rafn, H. Jeffrey and Stayman, Deborah G. (1976) `An Ethnography of Questioning in the Courtroom', in Roger W. Shuy and Anna Shnukal (eds) Language Use and the Uses of Language, pp. 222-234. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
12.
Forsyth, William (1852) History of Trial by Jury, 2nd edn, ed. James Appleton Morgan. Jersey City, NJ: Frederick Linn.
13.
Foster, Kenneth R. and Huber, Peter William (1993) Judging Science: Scientific Knowledge and the Federal Courts. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
14.
Foucault, Michel (1972) The Archeology of Knowledge and the Discourse on Language. New York: Pantheon.
15.
Foucault, Michel (1979) Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison, trans. Alan Sheridan. New York: Vintage.
16.
Foucault, Michel (1980) `Truth and Power', in Colin Gordon (ed.) Power/Knowledge: Selected Interviews & Other Writings, 1972-1977, pp. 109-133. New York: Pantheon.
17.
Foucault, Michel (1984) `Truth and Method', in Paul Rabinow (ed.) The Foucault Reader, pp. 51-75. New York: Pantheon.
18.
Foucault, Michel (1988) Madness and Civilization: A History of Insanity in the Age of Reason. New York: Vintage.
19.
Foucault, Michel (1990) The History of Sexuality: An Introduction, Vol. 1. New York: Vintage.
20.
Fraser, Bruce (1990) `An Approach to Discourse Markers', Journal of Pragmatics14(3): 383-395.
21.
Fraser, Bruce (1998) `Contrastive Discourse Markers in English', in Andreas H. Jucker and Yael Ziv (eds) Discourse Markers: Descriptions and Theories, pp. 301-326. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
22.
Fraser, Bruce (1999) `What are Discourse Markers?', Journal of Pragmatics31: 931-952.
23.
Freidson, Eliot (1986) Professional Power: A Study of the Institutionalization of Formal Knowledge. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
24.
Gould, Jonathan W. (1998) Conducting Scientifically Crafted Child Custody Evaluations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
25.
Green, Thomas Andrew (1985) Verdict According to Conscience: Perspectives on the English Criminal Trial Jury, 1200-1800. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
26.
Hand, Learned (1901) `Historical and Practical Considerations Regarding Expert Testimony', Harvard Law Review15: 40-58.
27.
Haskell, Thomas (ed.) (1984) The Authority of Experts: Studies in History and Theory. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
28.
Huber, Peter William (1999) Galileo's Revenge: Junk Science in the Courtroom. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
29.
Hunt, Alan (1992) `Foucault's Expulsion of the Law: Toward a Retrieval', Law and Society Inquiry17: 1-38.
30.
Hunt, Alan and Wicksham, Gary (1994) Foucault and the Law: Towards a Sociology of Law as Governance. London: Pluto Press.
31.
Jacoby, Joseph E. (1996) ` “We Don't Deal in Probabilities Here”: Tales of a Quantitative Sociologist in Court', in Pamela J. Jenkins and Steve Kroll-Smith (eds) Witnessing for Sociology: Sociologists in Court, pp. 19-39. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.
32.
Jones, Carol A.G. (1994) Expert Witnesses: Science, Medicine, and the Practice of Law. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
33.
Jucker, Andreas H. (1993) `The Discourse Marker Well: A Relevance-Theoretical Account', Journal of Pragmatics19: 435-452.
34.
McDonald, Keith (1995) The Sociology of the Professions. London: Sage.
35.
Matoesian, Gregory (1993) Reproducing Rape: Domination through Talk in the Courtroom. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
36.
Matoesian, Gregory (1999) `The Grammaticalization of Participation Roles in the Constitution of Expert Identity', Language in Society28: 491-521.
37.
O'Barr, William M. (1982) Linguistic Evidence: Language, Power and Strategy in the Courtroom. New York: Academic Press.
38.
Perkin, Harold (1989) The Rise of Professional Society: English Since 1880. London: Routledge.
39.
Pollock, Frederick and Maitland, Frederick William (1898) The History of English Law before the Time of Edward I, 2nd edn.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
40.
Renoe, Curtis E. (1996) `Seeing Is Believing: Expert Testimony and the Construction of Interpretive Authority in an American Trial', International Journal for the Semiotics of Law9: 115-137.
41.
Römkens, Renée (2000) `Ambiguous Responsibilities: Law and Conflicting Expert Testimony on the Abused Woman Who Shot Her Sleeping Husband', Law and Social Inquiry25(2): 355-391.
42.
Schiffrin, Deborah (1987) Discourse Markers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
43.
Stygall, Gail (1994) Trial Language: Differential Discourse Processing and Discursive Formation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
44.
Taslitz, Andrew E. (1999) Rape and the Culture of the Courtroom. New York: New York University Press.
45.
Tiersma, Peter (1999) Legal Language. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
46.
Van Dijk, Teun A. (1993) `Principles of Critical Discourse Analysis', Discourse & Society4(2): 249-283.
47.
Vázquez-Ayora, Geraldo (1977) Introducción a la traductología: curso básico de traducción. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
48.
Walker, Anne Graffam (1982a) `Discourse Rights of Witnesses: Their Circumspection in Trial', Sociolinguistic Working Paper 95. Austin, TX: Southwest Educational Development Laboratory.
49.
Walker, Anne Graffam (1982b) `Patterns and Implications of Co-Speech in a Legal Setting', in Robert DiPietro (ed.) Linguistics and the Professions, pp. 101-112. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
