Language, law and cisnormativity

linguistic-discursive strategies in a gender discrimination appelate decision

Abstract

ABSTRACT: This paper was intended to explore, from a case study, on how the legal discourse can be an instrument of normatization and domination. Our interest was centered on the relationship between the recontextualization and representation of social actors, seeking to understand the functions of the linguistics choices used for the argumentative construction of the judicial decision. Thus, we look at the execution of a judicial decision regarding the use of bathrooms by trans people, investigating the textual, discursive, and ideological components and strategies of its composition. For these purposes, we use the dialectical-relational approach of Critical Discourse Studies (FAIRCLOUGH, 2003; 2004; 2009), using the categories of modalization, evaluation and representation of social actors (VAN LEEUWEN, 2008), in addition to correlating them to general modes of operation of the ideology (THOMPSON, 2011). We tend to observe that, in the sample in question, based on a process of recontextualization, the author of the process, formerly a victim of gender discrimination, started to exercise the characteristics of the causative agent of the actions she requested, so that she assumed the role of “ agent ” in most of the syntactic-semantic constructions of negative events. On the other hand, the defendant was represented as conciliatory and peaceful with a suppressed agency or in the background in events of negative value. Finally, in our analysis, we note that the porous character of language was used to order argumentative maneuvers that culminated in discriminatory and exclusionary decision making and that there is an urgent need for greater reflections on cis-normative legal actions that do not recognize the right of trans people.

Keywords: Forensic Linguistics; Critical Discourse Studies; Gender Discrimination; Appellate Decision; The use of bathrooms by trans people.