Alan M. Perlman, an academically trained career linguist, is a forensic expert who offers clients exceptional quality, experience, and expertise. He is one of a small number of linguistics experts who assist the legal professions.
Like other forensic linguists, Dr. Perlman applies the principles and methods of linguistics to the language of legal proceedings, disputes, and documents. (See Areas of Expertise below.)
He has a PhD in linguistics and more than 20 years of experience as an expert in forensic linguistics and the systematic analysis of language it requires. His expertise represents a unique combination: a deep theoretical understanding of the workings of language…together with extensive experience in the application of linguistic principles to the analysis of language samples in order to assist attorneys, other legal professionals, law enforcement personnel, and others in understanding the linguistic issues that bear upon particular cases.
Dr. Perlman is a highly competent forensic expert witness who produces expert witness reports, depositions, and testimony that conform to the Daubert criteria and are legally and logically rigorous, as well as easily intelligible to both laymen and legal professionals.
- For a quick — but accurate — summary of political rhetoric, read this - This is as good a summary of political rhetoric as I’ve seen: “Political speeches are rarely occasions for truth-telling. But the good ones combine a description of shared reality with the expression of a vision, or with words of celebration. The mediocre ones consist of platitudes—well-intentioned but lacking the force of inspiration or recognition. And... Read more »
- Is Stephen Miller making policy decisions? Who is Stephen Miller? - The answer to the second question is easier than the answer to the first. Miller is from Santa Monica http://www.latimes.com/politics/washington/la-na-essential-washington-updates-trump-speechwriter-stephen-miller-pens-1495224315-htmlstory.html and, by whatever circuitous paths speechwriters’ careers take (and there are some weird ones), he is writing the President’s speeches. At least, that’s the only source for Trump’s formal rhetoric that I could find. Usually... Read more »
- She judges you when you use poor grammar - Amazon just informed me of a book, by Sharon Eliza Nichols, entitled I Judge You When You Use Poor Grammar: A Collection of Egregious Errors, Disconcerting Bloopers, and Other Linguistic Slip-Ups (Paperback – September 29, 2009). In fact, there’s a whole series of books around the “More Badder Grammar” rubric. Of course, I’ll order the... Read more »
- So, like, what’s up with this new use of “so”? - I like to watch language change the way many people like to see the seasons change – in fact, I like them both. Language change is the more unpredictable, yet, like the eternal revolution of heat and cold, it is inevitable and inexorable. English existed as a language as early as the 5th century... Read more »
- Reply to student: suggested authorship project - This rarest of all things — a legitimate letter from Nigeria (at least, I think — it didn’t ask for money) landed in my in-box: Hello Dr. Alan. I am N__________from Nigeria. I am a student of Stylistics at the University of Ilorin, Nigeria. My professor requested for a term paper on ‘Forensic Stylistics’ and... Read more »
- PS: Language judgments and prejudices - A PS to the previous post: We judge people by the way they speak, by which I mean we apply to them the generalizations we have gleaned from past associations with people who speak that way. I caution against being too hasty with these snap judgments. There are very good reasons why a non-stupid person... Read more »
- No, I’m not peeved by people who can’t keep “their,” “they’re” and “there” straight - My sweet wife is peeved. She wrote a Facebook post and started a thread. Apparently others are peeved too. As a linguist, I don’t get peeved. Well, sometimes I do. But I try to observe and learn. [ I think there are some linguistic developments we can do without, but people have always thought that. ... Read more »
- Linguist looks at 2nd Amendment - One thing I understand about New Hampshire, after eight years here, is that the state’s bold and famous motto, “live free or die,” refers mainly to the second half of the 2nd Amendment. A few years ago, its (not my) Legislature was considering laws that will make concealed-carry easier and (this one really make me... Read more »
- Questions about the war on clickbait - “People tell us they don’t like stories that are misleading, sensational, or spammy. That includes clickbait headlines that are designed to get attention and lure visitors into clicking on a link.” Facebook blog So Facebook has declared war on clickbait. The post defines three categories. “Spammy” I can understand. But we already have protection built... Read more »
- What plagiarism is – and is not - I confidently predict that sometime in the next year, a public figure (or even someone you know) will be accused of plagiarism. When that happens, read this first: What plagiarism is — and is not A brief definition: plagiarism is knowingly appropriating another’s original words and/or ideas and presenting them as one’s own. As... Read more »