The language(s) used in the courtroom in any society forms a distinct register. The styles used by the judge, the advocate, the accused, the plaintiff, make language use in the courtroom a special universe of discourse and merits study as such.

Silence as a style in Courtroom Procedure

Silence is communication. It is as much communication as language. Absence of silence like absence of a word may have many meanings. Silence may denote assent, dissent, doubt and neutral posture. Gandhi used silence as protest. Silence is ambiguous. It has a special place in the courtroom procedure. When an accused maintains silence it is difficult to interpret whether his silence is meant to delve into memory lane and make a faithful reconstruction or is it a deliberate act of false fabrication. Many scholars who have studied courtroom interaction have categorised silence in three ways:

• Silence occurring between one term and the next
• Silence belonging within the broad term, and
• Silence as property of the exchange system.

Whichever way one looks as it, its ambiguity becomes apparent. The lawyer can take a pause while letting the unsuspecting witness know that it is a trap. He can then argue that although the witness was given sufficient time he could not make use of it to come out with the truth proves his falsity.

In a reparty between a judge and an advocate, the infuriated judge called the advocate an ‘Idiot’. The advocate bowed down and said “I am not as great an idiot as you, me Lord ... think me to be”. The intervening pause between “Me Lord” and “think me to be” had already done the damages. This area of courtroom interaction has not been studied in India. It is time that some researcher takes interest in the study of silence as a style in courtroom interaction.

Code-mixing as a Style in Courtroom Interaction

The courtroom situation is complex not only from the point of view of of the trial, but also from that of language. Language in the courtroom assumes importance, because communication across tables is one of precision in form to communicate messages. Speakers in this situation manipulate speech to achieve beneficial results.

Discussing the study of courtroom language :’Barr (1982) says that there are three reasons for the inadequate study of courtroom behaviour.

• Legal practitioners are concerned with the planning and executing courtroom strategies that they are unable to devote attention observing courtroom behaviour.
• Social Scientists have not paid much attention to the role of language as a factor in courtroom process.
• There is considerable difficulty in understanding the complicated processes that occur in the court.

Spoken language in the courtroom is different from spoken language in any other situation. It is partly because of the nature of the legal language, and partly because of the courtesies and politeness strategies used in multilingual situation which may dictate that the lawyer act as an interpreter between the accused and the court. Discussing the nature of spoken legal language O’Barr et al (1976) suggests four varieties of spoken legal language. The are :

• Formal legal language
• Standard English
• Colloquial English, and
• Sub-cultural varieties

It is unfortunate that because of the dominant monolingual orientation of the white English speakers of America, the variety of English different from the standard are considered sub-cultural varieties. If one compares their situation with India, one would probably, posit the following varieties of legal languages in legal contexts.

• Formal legal language, whether English or regional language
• Regional Standard English
• Colloquial English
• Varieties of languages other than the dominant regional language.

It will thus be seen that the function of different dialects of English in a monolingual context parallels functions of different languages in a multilingual context.

It may however be noted that code-mixing is a feature of all the four levels and code-switching and code-mixing take place in spoken courtroom context.

In the formal legal language which closely parallels the written legal language there are mixtures of Persian, English and the regional languages because of the peculiar legal history in this country. Standard English with regional flavour is used by the judge and the lawyer while delivering judgements or arguing the cases. Colloquial English is used in conversation or question-answer among the lawyer and their clients and even sometimes between the judge and the lawyer. Given below are some of the examples of code-mixing in a district court in Karnataka where the contexts have been identified.

Examples of interaction in the courtroom (Second Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Mysore District) :

• Next day b?r be:ka, swamy? (This is a question posed by the accused to the Magistrate)
• (i) yel?ma nin lawyeru? (This is a question posed by the Magistrate to the accused
(ii) b?rtha:re swamy (Answer to the above question)
• Mysore ge, wholesale liquor dealer ?nthe (Answer to a query posed by the Magistrate to the caller)
• Report b?ndhidhe, ?v?rdhu lawyer ke:lthene, I will send him.
• a:gila ?ndhre ... we’ll show the orders to them ... ye:n a:gbitidhe ?ndhre ... he has failed to produce ...

In a place like Mysore, for example, where there are Urdu, Marathi, Telugu and Tamil speakers besides Kannada language speakers, it is only expected that some of the people would use their language in the courtroom. Very often however, these are code-mixed with Kannada and often with English to facilitate communication. Even in English written reports of cross-examinations, there are examples of code-mixing. The following are some of the examples.

Examples of Kannada/Tamil words, referring to items of jewellery used in a cross-examination undertaken in Kannada and written in English.

• One V. Shanmugam had pledged one fancy necklace set with stones, one row of fancy neck chain and two rows cycle chain with the initials ‘V.L.’ on the Mogapu.
• He had pledged an gold avalakki chain with two rows.
• .... two rows of gold cycle chain pattern a rope chain one row, one ‘vanki ring with stones’.
• She had pledged a pair of gold bangles, a gold navarathna ring, a pair of gold ear-rings set with stones and a pair of gold jumki.
• He had pledged one gold dundina chain set with red stones with a Gandabherunda pendant.
• He had pledged one gold sharadu chain tika pedant studed with pearls and stones.
• She had pledged gold two rowed pavithra mudi chain with the initials L.C.
• ..... pledged a gold jade bille with stones and a pair of fancy jumki.
• ..... pledged one gold karadege, a gold necklace and two bangles.
• She had pledged a gold hand kappa which is also called bandhi.
• I agree there is a difference between Jahangir bale and a wrist watch chain. So also between kappa and wrist watch chain.
• She had pledged a pair of gold glass patti bangles and a gold chain of one row of cycle chain pattern.
• She had pledged a pair of gold Sindhi bangles.
• He had pledged gold two rows avalakki chain with a pendant, six small and eight big lakshmi kasu, a mangalya, one bulaki set with stones, one rakshethali, four nellikayi rounds of gold and ten gold rounds and three gold patte rounds, three gold gejjes.
• I see that application is marked as ... he had pledged a gold one row fancy chain with the hook of moon.
• He had pledged a gold one row spring chain with a chandra hook.

(15, 16: refers to ‘hook’ but to conceptually describe the book, the English as well as Kannada reference terms is used).