Paper short abstract:

I seek to develop theories of language and power by elucidating power struggles over dialects: how unequal power relationships play out over the use of dialects in Kansai courtrooms among judges, lawyers, and defendants.

Paper long abstract:

Based on extensive ethnographic research in civil and criminal courts in the Kansai area, this paper analyzes how judges and lawyers use dialects for various functions, even though courts are considered to be a public place where Standard Japanese is expected to be used. Extensive analysis revealed that lawyers and judges used dialects strategically 1) to manipulate counterparties by creating a relaxed space and banal atmosphere to get them off guard and then by attacking and pinning them down, 2) to shift from monotonous Standard Japanese to rhythmical dialects to call attention to their arguments, 3) to conceal unfavorable evidence, and 4) to report others' accounts spoken in a dialect.

Lawyers and judges used those functions of dialects to gain power over defendants and witnesses and they constructed language ideologies about their dialect use as strategic and maneuverable tools. Laypersons in court, however, used Standard Japanese, their formal language, except for in their reported speech. In some politically laden trials where defendants consciously performed their dialects to assert their identities, their dialects were discouraged, ignored, and replaced with Standard Japanese in the court record (the processes of "erasure (Irvine and Gal 2000)").

This asymmetry of power in court restricts participants' rights to use their own language - the language that embodies their identity and way of life. This restriction not only compromises participants' ability to present evidence effectively, but also denies them the opportunity to resist the naturalized ideology that Standard Japanese is the language that everyone should understand.