000			01601nam a2200349 i 4500
001			EDZ0001756689
003			StDuBDS
005			20220729124430.0
006			m||||||||d||||||||
007			cr |||||||||||
008			170720s2017 nyu fob 001|0|eng|d
020			_a9780190669928
040			_aStDuBDS _beng _cStDuBDS _erda _epn
050		4	_aP325.5.A46
082	0	4	_a347.066 _223 _bSH-D
100	1		_aShuy, Roger W _994220
245	1	0	_aDeceptive ambiguity by police and prosecutors
260			_c2017 _aNew York _bOxford University Press
300			_a1 online resource.
490	1		_aOxford studies in language and law
500			_aPreviously issued in print: 2017.
504			_aIncludes bibliographical references and index.
520	8		_aAmbiguity is commonly considered unintentional while deception is considered intentional. Here, Roger W. Shuy describes fifteen criminal cases in which police, prosecutors, and undercover agents used deceptive ambiguity with criminal suspects and defendants, many times giving evidence of being intentionally constructed through the manipulation of the speech events, schemas, agendas, speech acts, strategies, lexicon, and grammar.
521			_aSpecialized.
650		0	_aAmbiguity. _994221
650		0	_aDeception. _994222
650		0	_aCriminal justice, Administration of _zUnited States _vCase studies. _994223
776	0	8	_iPrint version : _z9780190669898
830		0	_aOxford studies in language and law. _968059
856	4	0	_3Oxford scholarship online _uhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190669898.001.0001
942			_2ddc _cEBK
999			_c1281580 _d1281580