Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Intercultural communication in legal contexts

Christoph A. Hafner, Biyu Jade Du

Research output: Chapters, Conference Papers, Creative and Literary WorksRGC 12 - Chapter in an edited book (Author)peer-review

Abstract

Much applied linguistic work on language and law has focused on the description of features of legal discourse; for example in written legal documents and face-to-face interactions in court. Early studies suggest that specialised legal communication is difficult for non-specialists to access as it follows conventions that are unique to legal culture. The work on language and law now suggests three main types of cultural factors that may hinder communication in legal contexts. First, intercultural communication problems may arise between legal specialists and non-specialist participants in legal processes when the communication takes place in the same national and legal setting. Second, interactions between legal specialists and non-specialists may be further complicated when participants from different national cultures are involved. Non-specialist participants require assistance not only with issues of language, but also with issues related to culture difference. Third, problems of intercultural communication arise in multilingual and multicultural contexts, for example, where legal rules are drafted to apply across legal systems and national contexts. This chapter explores issues in intercultural communication in legal contexts with reference to these three sets of factors.
Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationThe Routledge Handbook of Language and Intercultural Communication
EditorsJane Jackson
Place of PublicationAbingdon, Oxon
PublisherRoutledge
Pages521-534
EditionSecond Edition
ISBN (Electronic)9781003036210
ISBN (Print)9781138389458
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 14 May 2020

Publication series

NameRoutledge Handbooks in Applied Linguistics

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Intercultural communication in legal contexts'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this