Ideology in the Language of Judges

• Introduction 1: Ideology in Discourse 2: The Myth of the Trial Court Judge as Nonideological 3: Intertextual Relations between Written and Spoken Genres of Law 4: Two Ideological Stances in Taking Guilty Pleas 5: Judges' Ideologies of Courtroom Control 6: Ideological Diversity in Legal Discourses Appendixes Appendix A: Social Background Questionnaire Appendix B: Career History Interview Appendix C: Rule 17, Arizona Rules of Criminal Procedure: Pleas of Guilty and No Contest Appendix D: Plea Agreement Appendix E: Transcription Notations Appendix F: Four Changes of Plea / Guilty Plea Transcripts Appendix G: Refusal of Plea Agreement in Aborted Sentencing Transcript Notes References Index

Ideology in the Language of Judges gives evidence that people do not compartmentalize their beliefs, however much they may wish to or belive that they are capable of it. Ideology reveals itself in behavior and speech. Susan Philips is an anthropologist who decide to study culture and social structure in the U.S. court system. To acquaint herself with the 'language'' she attended a year of law school.