An Economic and Empirical Analysis of Certain Linguistic Practices Concerning Admission of Evidence

11 Pages Posted: 3 May 2006

Abstract

This contribution to a mock symposium empirically examines the implications of using the phrase "into evidence" rather than "in evidence" to describe introducing an exhibit in a trial. The article describes the relevance of economic efficiency analysis to the study of linguistics and presents empirical evidence showing that linguistic preference has practical implications of great utility in a growing economy. It discusses data collected for twenty-two states (two from each federal circuit) and from three statistical sources, expanding on the theory that one would expect that states favoring the "in" preposition would have economic characteristics different from those favoring the "into" form of speech. The study shows that states favoring the "in evidence" phraseology tend to have higher unemployment and greater economic growth than states favoring the "into evidence" phraseology. Finally, the article examines the correlation between relevant economic and cultural variables and the phrases, demonstrating inter alia that there is no evidence that a male power structure in a state is related to the linguistic choice, as suggested by at least one feminist.

Keywords: linguistics, trial practice, economic growth, unemployment, feminism

Suggested Citation

Barnes, David W., An Economic and Empirical Analysis of Certain Linguistic Practices Concerning Admission of Evidence. Northwestern University Law Review, Vol. 91, 1997, Seton Hall Public Law Research Paper No. 899805, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=899805

David W. Barnes (Contact Author)

Seton Hall Law School ( email )

One Newark Center
Newark, NJ 07102
United States
201-709-8829 (Phone)
973-642-8194 (Fax)

Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?

Paper statistics

Downloads
42
Abstract Views
678
PlumX Metrics