Maynard1982a
| Maynard1982a | |
|---|---|
| BibType | ARTICLE |
| Key | Maynard1982a |
| Author(s) | Douglas W. Maynard |
| Title | Person description in plea bargaining |
| Editor(s) | |
| Tag(s) | EMCA, Justice, Plea Bargaining, Person descriptions |
| Publisher | |
| Year | 1982 |
| Language | English |
| City | |
| Month | |
| Journal | Semiotica |
| Volume | 42 |
| Number | 2/4 |
| Pages | 195-213 |
| URL | |
| DOI | |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
Parties to a conversation often talk about other people: friends, acquaintances, relatives, strangers, clients, public figures, and so forth. In so doing, they face a selectional problem: namely, of all the things that might be said of a person, how is something chosen for a particular conversation? The particular conversations forming the data for this study are transcribed plea negotiations from misdemeanor criminal cases, recorded among defense lawyers, district attorneys, and judges in a municipal court. Talk about defendants, identification of their biographies, and assessments of their characters are prominent features of these negotiations. Yet of the many things that could possibly be said regarding defendants' backgrounds, a relative few are utilized. That is, as Atkinson and Drew (1979: 248) put it, '...a description is in principle incomplete, and hence necessarily a selection from what could have been said'. This paper describes a principle that is exhibited in the work that lawyers do to relevantly talk about defendants in the cases before them.
Notes
