A corpus-based examination of reflexive metadiscourse in majority and dissent opinions of the U.S. Supreme Court

Research output: Journal Publications and ReviewsRGC 21 - Publication in refereed journalpeer-review

7 Scopus Citations
View graph of relations

Author(s)

Detail(s)

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)224-235
Journal / PublicationJournal of Pragmatics
Volume186
Online published6 Nov 2021
Publication statusPublished - Dec 2021
Externally publishedYes

Abstract

This article examines the use of reflexive metadiscourse in majority and dissent opinions of the U.S Supreme Court (SCOTUS). In doing so, it deals with two largely overlooked phenomena in studies on judicial discourse and reflexive metadiscourse respectively. In relation to the former, it examines the phenomenon of separate opinions. In relation to the latter, it examines the discursive foci of reflexive metadiscourse in interactive written genres. Using two corpora, one containing 60 majority decisions (302,921 words in total); one containing 60 dissent opinions (223,149 words in total), the results show that judicial opinion writers used a similar overall amount of reflexive metadiscourse. The results also identify a number of significant differences in the frequency use of reflexive metadiscourse. In their use of reflexive metadiscourse, majority writers display a pronounced self-focus (i.e., focus on their own discourse); dissent writers display a pronounced other-focus (i.e., focus on the majority's discourse). Reflecting the overall trend identified, highly significant differences were also identified in the use of communicating, clarifying, and enumerating devices. © 2021 Elsevier B.V.

Research Area(s)

  • Dissent opinions, Judicial discourse, Majority opinions, Reflexive metadiscourse, SCOTUS