Formulating disputes

This paper analyzes the role of formulations in dispute resolution as portrayed on the court show Judge Judy. Formulations have been studied in various institutional settings, but no studies, to my knowledge, have examined their role in a small claims court setting. The data for this study come from...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of pragmatics 2009-10, Vol.41 (10), p.2072-2085
1. Verfasser: van der Houwen, Fleur
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:This paper analyzes the role of formulations in dispute resolution as portrayed on the court show Judge Judy. Formulations have been studied in various institutional settings, but no studies, to my knowledge, have examined their role in a small claims court setting. The data for this study come from the court show Judge Judy, presided over by Judge Judith Sheindlin, a former family court judge. In this televised small claims court, a new version of events is co-constructed out of various competing stories. This study illustrates how various types of formulations constrain and project subsequent interaction. Formulating parts of litigants accounts allow Sheindlin to transform the plaintiff's and the defendant's opposing stories into a new version of events on which she can base her judgment. Litigants may resist some of the transformations by disconfirming and repairing Sheindlin's formulations.
ISSN:0378-2166
1879-1387
DOI:10.1016/j.pragma.2009.02.009