The language of courtroom questioning

We can use Conversation Analysis to compare the features of talk-in-interaction that are typical of ordinary social interaction, with the typical courtroom examination of witnesses and defendants. 

In ordinary conversation, turn taking displays local organization e.g. in adjacency pairs.

In contrast, courtroom questioning is restricted in:  

• the types of turns (questions and answers)

• who does what (lawyers ask questions, witnesses and defendants answer)

The pre-allocation of turns give power to the questioner to:

•  direct the agenda

• ‘assess’ (usually implicitly) the witness’s answer e.g. its veracity, credibility, adequacy etc

  • these are known as third turn assessments  

Questions in court are typically linked in a series, leading to a point:

• questioning may be co-operative, leading to a point that supports the witness’s story

• questioning may be hostile, leading to a point that doubts or undermines the witness’s account