DOCSLIB.ORG

Language and Jury Decision-Making in Texas Death Penalty Trials

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Language and Jury Decision-Making in Texas Death Penalty Trials The author(s) shown below used Federal funds provided by the U.S. Department of Justice and prepared the following final report: Document Title: Doing Death in Texas: Language and Jury Decision-Making in Texas Death Penalty Trials Author: Robin Helene Conley Document No.: 236354 Date Received: November 2011 Award Number: 2009-IJ-CX-0005 This report has not been published by the U.S. Department of Justice. To provide better customer service, NCJRS has made this Federally- funded grant final report available electronically in addition to traditional paper copies. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA Los Angeles Doing Death in Texas: Language and Jury Decision-Making in Texas Death Penalty Trials A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree Doctor of Philosophy in Anthropology by Robin Helene Conley 2011 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. This dissertation is dedicated first to my parents for their intellect, patience, and love. I dedicate it also to my unparalleled advisors: Alessandro Duranti, Elinor Ochs, Candy Goodwin, John Heritage and Justin Richland. iii This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Introduction.......................................................................................... ....p. 1 1.1 The death penalty in Texas..................................................... ....p. 2 1.2 Individuals and collectivities.............................................. ...p. 5 1.2a Legal and state personhood............................ ...........................p. 5 1.2b The particular and generalizable in law............ ........................p. 8 1.3 Legal processes as translation........................................... .........p. 11 1.4 Contributions to legal theory and practice........................ .........p. 13 1.5 Research design and methods........................................... .........p. 16 1.6 Overview of chapters........................................................ .........p. 24 2. Texas Justice: Locating place in ethnography.................................. ........p. 27 2.1 The concept of place in ethnography................................. .........p. 27 2.2 Place and identity in interaction........................................ .........p. 31 2.2a Constructing locality.................... .............................................p. 32 2.3 We are Texas: Inclusive pronouns and distinction in the production of identity................................................. ..........p. 36 2.4 Local justice: Distinguishing Texas, place and identity......... ....p. 44 2.4a Local variation..................................................................... .....p. 47 2.5 An eye for an eye: Christianity and the death penalty............ ....p. 52 2.6 “Somewhere down in Texas”: Texas as the country............... ....p. 56 2.7 Being a good juror in Texas and America.............................. .....p. 60 2.8 Deixis, place and identity...................................................... ......p. 62 2.9 Concluding remarks.............................................................. ......p. 68 3. Empathy, emotion and objectivity in death penalty trials................... ......p. 70 3.1 Defining empathy................................................................... .....p. 71 3.1a Empathy and culture...................................................... ............p. 75 3.1b Empathy and similarity................................................ ..............p. 78 3.2 Empathy vs. rationality in law.................................................. ...p. 81 3.3 Empathy and embodiment....................................................... ....p. 84 3.4 Mind/body dualism within the law.......................................... ....p. 86 3.5 Jurors' ideologies about reason, emotion and the law............. ....p. 88 3.6 Empathy and emotion as embedded in reason.................. ..........p. 97 3.7 Moral blameworthiness and emotional displays................... ......p. 100 3.8 Language, empathy and emotion........................................... .....p. 102 3.8a Legal language, emotion and sincerity.................. ....................p. 106 3.9 Empathy and emotion in death penalty trials.................. ............p. 108 3.9a Mediation of embodiment in court............................ ................p. 114 3.9b The face........................................ .............................................p. 121 3.9c Expectations of remorse.................. ..........................................p. 123 3.9d Mediating the defendant's voice........ ........................................p. 131 3.9e Defendants' demeanor.............. ..................................................p. 142 iv This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 3.10 Concluding remarks....................................... ............................p. 144 4. Living with the decision that someone will die: Linguistic distance in jurors' accounts of death penalty decisions............ ............p. 147 4.1 Introduction..................................................... .............................p. 147 4.2 Proximity, empathy and deixis.................................................. ...p. 149 4.3 Linguistic deixis and expanding the notion of proximity.......... ..p. 153 4.4 Linguistic deixis and moral relationships.................................. ..p. 156 4.5 Demonstrative reference as negotiating distance...................... ...p. 158 4.6 An analytic example of demonstrative reference and proximity ........p. 162 4.7 Examples of demonstrative reference as negotiating distance... ..p. 163 4.7a An illustrative example..................................................... ..........p. 164 4.7b Analyzing demonstrative reference forms.............................. ....p. 167 4.7c Examples of repair. p. 168 4.8 Analyses of a variety of demonstrative referenceforms and their distancing functions................................ .......................p. 169 4.8a Distal and proximal demonstrative references.................. .........p. 170 4.8b Demonstrative reference and dehumanization.................. .........p. 173 4.9 Jurors' linguistic and psychic distance from their decisions.... ....p. 175 4.10 Agency and demonstrative reference................... ......................p. 177 4.10a Demonstrative reference and defendants' criminal agency.. ...p. 178 4.10b Agency and demonstrative reference in jurors' penalty decisions p.184 4.11 Demonstrative reference and positive affect...................... ........p. 185 4.12 Empathy between speaker and hearer................................. .......p. 187 4.13 Examples from other jury data............................................ .......p. 189 4.14 Progression from direct to indirect reference as a distancing tactic p. 190 4.15 Concluding remarks.................... ...............................................p. 193 5. Linguistic and legal agency in death penalty trials................................. ...p. 195 5.1 Introduction................................................................... ...............p. 195 5.2 Grammatical agency....................................................... ..............p. 195 5.2a What is an agent?....................................................... .................p. 197 5.3 Legal and linguistic definitions of agency............................... .....p. 200 5.3a Mitigated and distributed agency......................................... .......p. 202 5.4 Identifying authority for capital sentencing decisions........... .......p. 203 5.5 Jurors' individual responsibility for sentencing decisions..... .......p. 211 5.6 Voir dire: Learning how to decide......................................... .......p. 214 5.7 Grammatical agency in jurors’ reflections on sentencing decisions p. 224 5.7a Grammatical agency in jurors' decisions..................... ...............p. 227 5.7b Group agency and anonymity.......................... ...........................p.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Judge Donohue's Courtroom Procedures
    JUDGE DONOHUE’S COURTROOM PROCEDURES I. INTRODUCTION A. Phone / Fax The office phone number is (541) 243-7805. During trials, your office, witnesses and family may leave messages with the judge’s judicial assistant. Those messages will be given to you by the courtroom clerk. Please call before sending faxes. The fax number is (541) 243-7877. You must first contact the judge’s judicial assistant before sending a fax transmission. There is a 10 page limit to the length of documents that can be sent by fax. We do not provide a fax service. We will not send an outgoing fax for you. B. Delivery of Documents You must file original documents via File and Serve. Please do not deliver originals to the judge or his judicial assistant unless otherwise specified in UTCR or SLR. You may hand- deliver to room 104, or email copies of documents to [email protected]. II. COURTROOM A. General Judge Donohue’s assigned courtroom is Courtroom #2 located on the second floor of the courthouse. B. Cell Phones / PDA’s Cell phones, personal digital assistant devices (PDA’s) and other types of personal electronic equipment may not be used in the courtroom without permission from the judge. If you bring them into the courtroom, you must turn them off or silence the ringer. C. Food, Drinks, Chewing Gum, Hats No food, drinks or chewing gum are permitted in the courtroom. Hats may not be worn in the courtroom. Ask the courtroom clerk if you need to seek an exception. JUDGE DONOHUE’S COURTROOM PROCEDURES (August 2019) Page 1 of 9 D.
    [Show full text]
  • “Until That Song Is Born”: an Ethnographic Investigation of Teaching and Learning Among Collaborative Songwriters in Nashville
    “UNTIL THAT SONG IS BORN”: AN ETHNOGRAPHIC INVESTIGATION OF TEACHING AND LEARNING AMONG COLLABORATIVE SONGWRITERS IN NASHVILLE By Stuart Chapman Hill A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Music Education—Doctor of Philosophy 2016 ABSTRACT “UNTIL THAT SONG IS BORN”: AN ETHNOGRAPHIC INVESTIGATION OF TEACHING AND LEARNING AMONG COLLABORATIVE SONGWRITERS IN NASHVILLE By Stuart Chapman Hill With the intent of informing the practice of music educators who teach songwriting in K– 12 and college/university classrooms, the purpose of this research is to examine how professional songwriters in Nashville, Tennessee—one of songwriting’s professional “hubs”—teach and learn from one another in the process of engaging in collaborative songwriting. This study viewed songwriting as a form of “situated learning” (Lave & Wenger, 1991) and “situated practice” (Folkestad, 2012) whose investigation requires consideration of the professional culture that surrounds creative activity in a specific context (i.e., Nashville). The following research questions guided this study: (1) How do collaborative songwriters describe the process of being inducted to, and learning within, the practice of professional songwriting in Nashville, (2) What teaching and learning behaviors can be identified in the collaborative songwriting processes of Nashville songwriters, and (3) Who are the important actors in the process of learning to be a collaborative songwriter in Nashville, and what roles do they play (e.g., gatekeeper, mentor, role model)? This study combined elements of case study and ethnography. Data sources included observation of co-writing sessions, interviews with songwriters, and participation in and observation of open mic and writers’ nights.
    [Show full text]
  • Forgiving & Forgetting in American Justice
    Forgiving and Forgetting in American Justice A 50-State Guide to Expungement and Restoration of Rights October 2017 COLLATERAL CONSEQUENCES RESOURCE CENTER The Collateral Consequences Resource Center is a non-profit organization established in 2014 to promote public discussion of the collateral consequences of conviction, the legal restrictions and social stigma that burden people with a criminal record long after their court-imposed sentence has been served. The resources available on the Center website are aimed primarily at lawyers and other criminal justice practitioners, scholars and researchers, but they should also be useful to policymakers and those most directly affected by the consequences of conviction. We welcome information about relevant current developments, including judicial decisions and new legislation, as well as proposals for blog posts on topics related to collateral consequences and criminal records. In addition, Center board members and staff are available to advise on law reform and practice issues. For more information, visit the CCRC at http://ccresourcecenter.org. This report was prepared by staff of the Collateral Consequences Resource Center, and is based on research compiled for the Restoration of Rights Project, a CCRC project launched in August 2017 in partnership with the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, the National Legal Aid & Defender Association, and the National HIRE Network. The Restoration of Rights Project is an online resource containing detailed state-by-state analyses of the law and practice in each U.S. jurisdiction relating to restoration of rights and status following arrest or conviction. Jurisdictional “profiles” cover areas such as loss and restoration of civil rights and firearms rights, judicial and executive mechanisms for avoiding or mitigating collateral consequences, and provisions addressing non- discrimination in employment and licensing.
    [Show full text]
  • Episode Fourteen: Legal Process Hello, and Welcome to the Death
    Episode Fourteen: Legal Process Hello, and welcome to the Death Penalty Information Center’s podcast exploring issues related to capital punishment. In this edition, we will discuss the legal process in death penalty trials and appeals. How is a death penalty trial different from other trials? There are several differences between death penalty trials and traditional criminal proceedings. In most criminal cases, there is a single trial in which the jury determines whether the defendant is guilty or not guilty. If the jury returns a verdict of guilty, the judge then determines the sentence. However, death penalty cases are divided into two separate trials. In the first trial, juries weigh the evidence of the crime to determine guilt or innocence. If the jury decides that the defendant is guilty, there is a second trial to determine the sentence. At the sentencing phase of the trial, jurors usually have only two options: life in prison without the possibility of parole, or a death sentence. During this sentencing trial, juries are asked to weigh aggravating factors presented by the prosecution against mitigating factors presented by the defense. How is a jury chosen for a death penalty trial? Like all criminal cases, the jury in a death penalty trial is chosen from a pool of potential jurors through a process called voir dire. The legal counsel for both the prosecution and defense have an opportunity to submit questions to determine any possible bias in the case. However, because the jury determines the sentence in capital trials, those juries must also be “death qualified,” that is, able to impose the death penalty in at least some cases.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Hon. Joel M. Cohen Part 3 – Practices and Procedures
    HON. JOEL M. COHEN PART 3 – PRACTICES AND PROCEDURES (revised September 14, 2020) Supreme Court of the State of New York Commercial Division 60 Centre Street, Courtroom 208 New York, NY 10007 Part Clerk/Courtroom Phone: 646-386-3275 Chambers Phone: 646-386-4927 Principal Court Attorney: Kartik Naram, Esq. ([email protected]) Law Clerk: Herbert Z. Rosen, Esq. ([email protected]) Courtroom Part Clerk: Sharon Hill ([email protected]) Chambers Email Address: [email protected] Courtroom hours are from 9:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. Lunch recess is from 1 p.m. to 2:15 p.m. The courtroom is closed during that time. Preliminary, Compliance, and Status Conferences generally are held on Tuesdays beginning at 9:30 a.m. Pre-trial Conferences and oral argument on motions will be held as scheduled by the Court. I. GENERAL A. The Rules of the Commercial Division, 22 NYCRR 202.70, are incorporated herein by reference, subject to minor modifications described below. B. The Court strongly encourages substantive participation in court proceedings by women and diverse lawyers, who historically have been underrepresented in the commercial bar. The Court urges litigants to be mindful of in-court advocacy opportunities for such lawyers who have not previously had substantial court experience in commercial cases, as well as less experienced lawyers generally (i.e. lawyers practicing for five years or less). A representation that oral argument on a motion will be handled or shared by such a lawyer will weigh in favor of holding a hearing when otherwise the motion would be decided on the papers.
    [Show full text]
  • MEMORANDUM ORDER ) Case No
    Case 2:07-cr-00023-EJL Document 284 Filed 02/26/08 Page 1 of 4 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF IDAHO UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) Plaintiff, ) MEMORANDUM ORDER ) Case No. CR07-23-N-EJL vs. ) ) JOSEPH EDWARD DUNCAN, III, ) Defendant. ) ____________________________________) Pending before the Court are the Defendant’s Motions to Declare the Federal Death Penalty Act Unconstitutional. The Government has filed a single response to the motions and the time for filing any reply has expired. The matter is ripe for the Court’s consideration. Having fully reviewed the record herein, the Court finds that the facts and legal arguments are adequately presented in the briefs and record. Accordingly, in the interest of avoiding further delay, and because the Court conclusively finds that the decisional process would not be significantly aided by oral argument, this motion shall be decided on the record before this Court without oral argument. Local Rule 7.1(d)(2)(ii). Factual and Procedural Background The Defendant, Joseph Edward Duncan, III, was charged with multiple crimes relating to events occurring in northern Idaho between May of 2005 and July of 2005. Three of the counts carry the potential for a sentence of death: Kidnapping Resulting in Death, Sexual Exploitation of a Child Resulting in Death, and Using a Firearm During and in Relation to a Crime of Violence MEMORANDUM ORDER - 1 Case 2:07-cr-00023-EJL Document 284 Filed 02/26/08 Page 2 of 4 Resulting in Death. The Government filed a notice of intent to seek the death penalty.
    [Show full text]
  • STARS Oshihiyi
    University of Central Florida STARS Text Materials of Central Florida Central Florida Memory 1-1-1914 Oshihiyi John B. Stetson University Find similar works at: https://stars.library.ucf.edu/cfm-texts University of Central Florida Libraries http://library.ucf.edu This Yearbook is brought to you for free and open access by the Central Florida Memory at STARS. It has been accepted for inclusion in Text Materials of Central Florida by an authorized administrator of STARS. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Recommended Citation John B. Stetson University, "Oshihiyi" (1914). Text Materials of Central Florida. 402. https://stars.library.ucf.edu/cfm-texts/402 Stetson QjlniUG/isitjj stetson Universi' 3 4369 00462879 9 00 KOT REMOVE FROflA LIBRARY ;/ ... •Ti''- ''Here's to the land of flowers and song, Where sorrow is brief and joys are long, Where the weak grow strong and the strong grow great. Here's to Florida, our dear home State." l^olume Seven of ^be ©sbibipi 1914 IPubliebeb b\) XLhc Junior Class of ITbe 3obn B, Stetson T^Hnivereit^ DeXanb, fflori^a Zo ®ur flnocF^tuG Birt) Trillets of humor, shrewdest whistle-wit, Contralto cadences of grave desire Such as from off the passionate Indian pyre. Drift down thro' sandal-odored flames that split About the slim young widow who doth sit And sing above—midnights of tone entire— Tissues of moonlight shot with songs of fire; Bright drops of tune, from oceans infinite Of melody, sipped off the thin-edged wave And trickling down the beak—discourses brave Of serious matter that no man may guess, Methinks I hear thy silver whistlings bright Mix with the mighty discourse of the wise.
    [Show full text]
  • Notes Toward a History of American Justice
    Buffalo Law Review Volume 24 Number 1 Article 5 10-1-1974 Notes Toward a History of American Justice Lawrence M. Friedman Stanford University Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.law.buffalo.edu/buffalolawreview Part of the Comparative and Foreign Law Commons, Criminal Law Commons, and the Legal History Commons Recommended Citation Lawrence M. Friedman, Notes Toward a History of American Justice, 24 Buff. L. Rev. 111 (1974). Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.buffalo.edu/buffalolawreview/vol24/iss1/5 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at Digital Commons @ University at Buffalo School of Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Buffalo Law Review by an authorized editor of Digital Commons @ University at Buffalo School of Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. NOTES TOWARD A HISTORY OF AMERICAN JUSTICE* LAWRRENCE M. FRIEDMAN** n Kent County, Delaware, in 1703, Adam Latham, a laborer, and Joan Mills, wife of a laborer named Andrew Mills, were brought before the county court. The grand jury presented Joan Mills for adultery. She pleaded guilty to the charge. For punishment, the court ordered her to be publicly whipped-21 lashes on her bare back, well applied; and she was also sentenced to prison, at hard labor, for one year. Adam Latham was convicted of fornication. He was sentenced to receive 20 lashes on his bare back, well laid on, in full public view. He was also accused of stealing Isaac Freeland's dark brown gelding, worth 2 pounds 10 shillings. Adam pleaded guilty; for this crime he was sentenced to another four lashes, and was further required to pay for the gelding.
    [Show full text]
  • SENATE JUD COMMITTEE -1- January 25, 2012 POSITION STATEMENT: Delivered a Presentation to the Crime Summit
    ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE SENATE JUDICIARY STANDING COMMITTEE January 25, 2012 8:37 a.m. MEMBERS PRESENT Senator Hollis French, Chair Senator Bill Wielechowski, Vice Chair Senator Joe Paskvan Senator Lesil McGuire Senator John Coghill MEMBERS ABSENT All members present OTHER LEGISLATORS PRESENT Senator Gary Stevens Senator Johnny Ellis Senator Fred Dyson Representative Pete Petersen COMMITTEE CALENDAR CRIME SUMMIT - HEARD PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION No previous action to record WITNESS REGISTER ERIN PATTERSON-SEXSON, Lead Advocate Direct Services Coordinator Standing Together Against Rape Anchorage, AK POSITION STATEMENT: Delivered a presentation to the Crime Summit. NANCY MEADE, General Counsel Alaska Court System Anchorage, AK SENATE JUD COMMITTEE -1- January 25, 2012 POSITION STATEMENT: Delivered a presentation to the Crime Summit. DIANE SCHENKER, Project Coordinator Fairbanks Electronic Bail Conditions Project Alaska Court System Anchorage, AK POSITION STATEMENT: Delivered a presentation to the Crime Summit. HELEN SHARRATT, Integrated Justice Coordinator Alaska Court System and Coordinator for MAJIC Anchorage, AK POSITION STATEMENT: Delivered a presentation to the Crime Summit. QUINLAN STEINER, Director Public Defender Agency Department of Administration Anchorage, AK POSITION STATEMENT: Delivered a presentation to the Crime Summit. RICHARD ALLEN, Director Office of Public Advocacy Department of Administration Anchorage, AK POSITION STATEMENT: Delivered a presentation to the Crime Summit. WALT MONEGAN, President and CEO Alaska Native Justice Center Anchorage, AK POSITION STATEMENT: Delivered a presentation to the Crime Summit. JAKE METCALFE, Executive Director Public Safety Employee Association Anchorage, AK POSITION STATEMENT: Delivered a presentation to the Crime Summit. TERRENCE SHANIGAN, Trooper Alaska State Troopers Department of Public Safety Talkeetna, AK SENATE JUD COMMITTEE -2- January 25, 2012 POSITION STATEMENT: Delivered a presentation to the Crime Summit.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 "Disco Madness: Walter Gibbons and the Legacy of Turntablism and Remixology" Tim Lawrence Journal of Popular Music S
    "Disco Madness: Walter Gibbons and the Legacy of Turntablism and Remixology" Tim Lawrence Journal of Popular Music Studies, 20, 3, 2008, 276-329 This story begins with a skinny white DJ mixing between the breaks of obscure Motown records with the ambidextrous intensity of an octopus on speed. It closes with the same man, debilitated and virtually blind, fumbling for gospel records as he spins up eternal hope in a fading dusk. In between Walter Gibbons worked as a cutting-edge discotheque DJ and remixer who, thanks to his pioneering reel-to-reel edits and contribution to the development of the twelve-inch single, revealed the immanent synergy that ran between the dance floor, the DJ booth and the recording studio. Gibbons started to mix between the breaks of disco and funk records around the same time DJ Kool Herc began to test the technique in the Bronx, and the disco spinner was as technically precise as Grandmaster Flash, even if the spinners directed their deft handiwork to differing ends. It would make sense, then, for Gibbons to be considered alongside these and other towering figures in the pantheon of turntablism, but he died in virtual anonymity in 1994, and his groundbreaking contribution to the intersecting arts of DJing and remixology has yet to register beyond disco aficionados.1 There is nothing mysterious about Gibbons's low profile. First, he operated in a culture that has been ridiculed and reviled since the "disco sucks" backlash peaked with the symbolic detonation of 40,000 disco records in the summer of 1979.
    [Show full text]
  • Exposure and Vulnerability
    Determinants of Risk: 2 Exposure and Vulnerability Coordinating Lead Authors: Omar-Dario Cardona (Colombia), Maarten K. van Aalst (Netherlands) Lead Authors: Jörn Birkmann (Germany), Maureen Fordham (UK), Glenn McGregor (New Zealand), Rosa Perez (Philippines), Roger S. Pulwarty (USA), E. Lisa F. Schipper (Sweden), Bach Tan Sinh (Vietnam) Review Editors: Henri Décamps (France), Mark Keim (USA) Contributing Authors: Ian Davis (UK), Kristie L. Ebi (USA), Allan Lavell (Costa Rica), Reinhard Mechler (Germany), Virginia Murray (UK), Mark Pelling (UK), Jürgen Pohl (Germany), Anthony-Oliver Smith (USA), Frank Thomalla (Australia) This chapter should be cited as: Cardona, O.D., M.K. van Aalst, J. Birkmann, M. Fordham, G. McGregor, R. Perez, R.S. Pulwarty, E.L.F. Schipper, and B.T. Sinh, 2012: Determinants of risk: exposure and vulnerability. In: Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation [Field, C.B., V. Barros, T.F. Stocker, D. Qin, D.J. Dokken, K.L. Ebi, M.D. Mastrandrea, K.J. Mach, G.-K. Plattner, S.K. Allen, M. Tignor, and P.M. Midgley (eds.)]. A Special Report of Working Groups I and II of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, and New York, NY, USA, pp. 65-108. 65 Determinants of Risk: Exposure and Vulnerability Chapter 2 Table of Contents Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................................67 2.1. Introduction and Scope..............................................................................................................69
    [Show full text]
  • Great Minds Speak Alike: Inter-Court Communication of Metaphor in Education Finance Litigation
    Great Minds Speak Alike: Inter-Court Communication of Metaphor in Education Finance Litigation Matt Saleh Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy under the Executive Committee of the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY 2015 © 2015 Matt Saleh All rights reserved ABSTRACT Great Minds Speak Alike: Inter-Court Communication of Metaphor in Education Finance Litigation Matt Saleh This project uses a mixed methods approach to analyze the communication of metaphors about educational equity and adequacy, between co-equal state supreme courts in education finance litigation (1971-present). Evidence demonstrates that a number of pervasive metaphors about students and educational opportunities (“sound basic education,” “marketplace of ideas,” students as “competitors in the global economy”) have been shared and conventionalized within judicial networks, with significant implications for how courts interpret educational rights under state constitutions. The project first conducts a qualitative discourse analysis of education finance litigation in New York State (four cases) using Pragglejaz Group’s (2007) Metaphor Identification Procedure, to identify micro-level examples of metaphor usage in actual judicial discourse. Then, it performs quantitative and qualitative social network analysis of the entire education finance judicial network for state supreme courts (65 cases), to analyze two different “relations” between this set of actors: shared citation (formal relation) and shared metaphor (informal relation). Data analysis shows that there exist both formal and informal channels of judicial communication—communication we can “see,” and communication we can’t—and commonalities in discursive strategies (informal ties) are, in some ways, potentially more cohesive than direct, formal ties.
    [Show full text]