Forensic linguistics encompasses a wide variety of disciplines. Dr. Perlman specializes in four of them, deriving from his academic background and his real-world experience as a writer and editor.
(1) Interpretation of contracts, wills, laws, and other binding documents: expert judgment on clarity, meaning, comprehensibility and (un)ambiguity.
What was intended to be said — and what, if anything, does the document actually say? Is it ambiguous, and, if so, what are the possible interpretations, given the semantics, syntax, and pragmatics (roughly, the intent) of the text(s) in question?
Prenups and other contracts designed to be air-tight are exactly where writing problems occur, as people try to execute complex ideas and cover all contingencies.
Dr. Perlman analyzes specific words, phrases, clauses, sentences, and other units, including the entire document, to offer informed judgments on clarity, comprehensibility, and (un)ambiguity.
Case example: A man suffered damages from defective rental equipment; he did not know that he had released the company from liability by signing a contract that was, when quantitatively compared with everyday writing (e.g., USA Today), too complex to understand.
(2) Plagiarism: expert opinion on likelihood of plagiarism.
In the Internet age, plagiarism – deliberate, dishonest appropriation of another’s words and/or ideas — has been redefined.
Problems occur when the traditional definitions are applied: similarity of text, which is what plagiarism tools find, is not a basis for a charge of plagiarism. It is not unique but prosaic information that is most likely copied, thus undermining the traditional charge of plagiarism. Much more is in the public domain than ever before.
Case example: The creator of an online course found it stolen and being offered – with sentence structure modified — by someone else. Dr. Perlman helped substantiate his charges.
Case examples: Dr. Perlman has defended many academic writers, from college students to law professors, against groundless charges of plagiarism, which are often based on (i) similarity of items in the public domain or (ii) misunderstanding of the institution’s quotation/paraphrase rules.
In literary plagiarism allegations, one writer accuses another of stealing his/her ideas. But these usually turn out to be widespread, occurring in typical books of this genre. Courts have ruled that elements of theme and setting are not protectable..
(3) Copyright/trademark infringement: informed judgment on the genericity, specificity, and protectability of individual words, phrases, and brand names; assessment of linguistic similarity to evaluate infringement claims.
The question here is: to what extent is the item already part of the language (unless it’s a “fanciful” term like Xerox or Xanax, the most easily protectable)?
If it is already a lexical unit, it can still be trademarked, even if it’s “suggestive” (Dawn, Joy) or descriptive (Simple Green). But you cannot market a name that already stands for a whole category of items, e.g., Pants.
Dr. Perlman also considers cases in which one company’s mark may be too similar to another’s, causing confusion to consumers or clients.
Case example: Dr. Perlman demonstrated that another marketer’s brand name was, on several linguistic levels, similar to that of the attorney’s client.
(4) Authorship: Dr. Perlman conducts analysis of a language sample — the grammar, lexicon, and other features — to offer an expert opinion on the likelihood of particular suspected writers, single-author/forged texts, and other legal/linguistic hypotheses, via a method verified in thousands of acadeimc studies and real-world cases.
Here’s where his vast experience in text analysis is relevant. Everybody has a writing style — some more obvious than others — and he can usually make an authorship call with some (or a lot of) certainty based on feature occurrence and pattern similarities. If the writer is a foreign language speaker, his/her style will be even more obvious.
Case example: anonymous letters of complaint to a company’s Board; forged letters (by a single author) in employment dispute.
Case example: An ex-husband’s new wife was writing emails over his signature. Dr. Perlman was asked to identify the elements of her style and help resolve the disputed authorship.
Other examples from the above four case categories:
Expert opinion on status of compound words (trademark infringement litigation).
Expert opinion on plagiarism of song lyrics (copyright litigation involving musical group The Who).
Authorship analysis of e-mails in Florida internal union dispute.
Preliminary analysis of authorship issues in malpractice litigation.
Expert opinion on authorship issues in business partnership dispute involving anonymous writings.
Authorship analysis of anonymous letters of complaint to a corporation’s Board of Directors.
Expert opinion on the semantics of trademark infringement in litigation by an apparel firm.
Authorship analysis of anonymous letters (possibly written by disgruntled employees) for major Midwestern corporation.
Authorship analysis of emails to website of a “cult deprogrammer.”
Expert opinion on linguistic similarities between plaintiff’s and defendant’s trademarks.
Authorship analysis of defamatory emails written to an individual in a corporation.
Authorship advice on a possibly forged stock transfer document.
Authorship analysis of letters involved in the Son of Sam case.
Analysis to support allegations of plagiarism of online course material.
Interpretation of contract language regarding the disposition of acquired corporate entities.
Defense against charges of academic and student plagiarism (several cases).
Analysis of chat transcripts to determine whether defendant engaged in enticement or seduction.
Authorship analysis of emails in divorce and custody disputes (several cases).
Expert opinion on whether The DaVinci Code was plagiarized from the client’s writing (it was not).
Offering a new service: editing and writing support
As of July 1, Dr. Perlman will officially (there have been unofficial cases) begin to advertise himself as an assistant/editor for legal documents and articles.
Need an expert?
Stipulated: attorneys and other legal professionals are in general good to excellent writers. But the law, as eminent linguist Roger Shuy put it, is overwhelmingly about language. In legal documents and articles, the most complex ideas have to be conveyed in the most understandable, persuasive, and unmistakable way.
There is typically room for improvement. Dr. Perlman can provide the benefit of his long years of experiience in the improvement of most legal documents — emphasis on “most”:. If they pass muster in the eyes of a former English professor, professional writer, and academic linguist…well, good for them! It’s a high bar. But still, most documents could benefits from a linguist’s evaluation, even if only a few sentences are improved. Often it’s more than that.
Consult him at email@example.com
- Language change: getting it right - The attitudes and prejudices of speakers towards various languages and dialects is important “peri-linguistic” data. They may influence the development and differentiation of language itself. Or they may not — just voices in the wind. Gripes of a pseudo-expert Thus, when a major, even venerable magazine, Harper’s, publishes an essay “Semantic Drift” by Lionel Shriver,... Read more »
- Code-switching and pandering – a new low - Spare me the sight / of this thankless breed, these politicians / who cringe for favors from a screaming mob / and do not care what harm they do their friends / providing they can please a crowd! Euripides, Hecuba (c. 425 BCE) This post introduces my Blahblahblah Award, bestowed upon the politician using the... Read more »
- On baby talk and language change - Is sloppiness in speech caused by ignorance or apathy? I don’t know and I don’t care. William Safire I admire John McWhorter so much for the breadth of his accomplishments, his accessibility to the media, his eloquent lectures. I recently saw a video clip in which he pegged Trump’s speech as characteristic of... Read more »
- Words, maps, territories, and the political abuse of language - The truth is what most people believe. And they believe that which is repeated most often. Paul Josef Goebbels Here is the text of a letter I sent to the Manchester NH Union-Leader (published 6/21/19): March 19, 2019 Dear Editor, Let me add my voice to the chorus of people outraged by Rep. Ocasio-Cortez’s... Read more »
- The Babel problem and the dangers of multilingualism - And they said, “Come, let us build us a city, and a tower with its top in the sky, to make a name for ourselves; else we shall be scattered all over the world.” The Lord came down to look at the city and tower that man had built, and the Lord said, “If, as... Read more »
- Who’s got the sexiest accent? Not me. - I just read an article on “who’s got the sexiest accent?’, and when I Googled the article, I discovered that “sexiest accent” generates over four million hits. As Trump said about health care, who knew there were so many surveys? The ones I skimmed through seemed mostly intended as tourism boosters, at least for the... Read more »
- The difference between code-switching and pandering (pay attention, Hillary) - “…style is intrinsic and private, like…voice or gesture, partly a matter of inheritance, partly of cultivation. It is more than a pattern of expression. It is the pattern of the soul.” -Maurice Valency Think of language as haberdashery: you have a closet full of clothes for every occasion. Your clothing choice expresses yourself in a... Read more »
- Biden’s plagiarism alone disqualifies him - Don’t forget why God made your eyes — plagiarize! Tom Lehrer, “Lobachevsky” I’m involved in a fair number of plagiarism cases. In non-fiction allegations, I typically represent a student who has omitted quotations marks, possibly because he/she was lifting what appeared to be basic background information. There are very few ways of saying... Read more »
- Political language 2019: simpler but no less devious - Definitions of “politician”: An eel in the fundamental mud upon which the superstructure of organized society is reared. Ambrose Bierce (One who) divides mankind into two classes: tools and enemies. That means he knows only one class: enemies. Friedrich Nietzsche [Someone] who identifies the sound of his own voice with the infallible voice of the... Read more »
- “You have the right to remain silent…”: On understanding the Miranda warning (it’s not so easy) - 1. You have the right to remain silent. 2. Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. 3. You have the right to talk to a lawyer and have him present with you while you are being questioned. 4. If you cannot afford to hire a lawyer, one... Read more »