By the author of "Atlantic Monthly's" highly popular column "Word Court" comes an engaging grammar guide for lovers of language, a national bestseller now in paperback.
Federal judges, legal scholars, pundits, and reporters frequently describe the Supreme Court as the final word on the meaning of the Constitution. The historical record presents an entirely different picture. A close and revealing reading of that record, from 1789 to the present day, Reconsidering Judicial Finality reminds us of the “unalterable fact,” as Chief Justice Rehnquist once remarked, “that our judicial system, like the human beings who administer it, is fallible.” And a Court inevitably prone to miscalculation and error, as this book clearly demonstrates, cannot have the incontrovertible last word on constitutional questions. In this deeply researched, sharply reasoned work of legal myth-busting, constitutional scholar Louis Fisher explains how constitutional disputes are settled by all three branches of government, and by the general public, with the Supreme Court often playing a secondary role. The Court’s decisions have, of course, been challenged and reversed in numerous cases—involving slavery, civil rights, child labor legislation, Japanese internment during World War II, abortion, and religious liberty. What Fisher shows us on a case-by-case basis is how the elected branches, scholars, and American public regularly press policies contrary to Court rulings—and regularly prevail, although the process might sometimes take decades. From the common misreading of Marbury v. Madison, to the mistaken understanding of the Supreme Court as the trusted guardian of individual rights, to the questionable assumptions of the Court’s decision in Citizens United, Fisher’s work charts the distance and the difference between the Court as the ultimate arbiter in constitutional matters and the judgment of history. The verdict of Reconsidering Judicial Finality is clear: to treat the Supreme Court’s nine justices as democracy’s last hope or as dangerous activists undermining democracy is to vest them with undue significance. The Constitution belongs to all three branches of government—and, finally, to the American people.
The present volume is an empirical, corpus-based study of the progressive in 19th-century English. As the 1800s have been relatively neglected in previous research, and as the study is based on a new cross-genre corpus focusing on this period (CONCE = A Corpus of Nineteenth-Century English), the volume adds significantly to our knowledge of the historical development of the progressive. The use of two separate measures enables an accurate account of the frequency development of the progressive, which is also related to multi-feature/multi-dimensional analyses. Other topics covered include the complexity of progressive verb phrases and the distribution of the construction across linguistic parameters such as clause type. Special attention is paid to progressives that express something beyond purely aspectual meaning. The results show that the progressive became more fully integrated into English grammar over the 19th century, but also that linguistic and extralinguistic parameters affected this integration process; for instance, the construction was more common in women’s than in men’s private letters. Owing to the wide methodological scope of the study, it is of interest to linguists specializing in corpus linguistics, language variation and change, verbal syntax, the progressive, or the linguistic expression of aspect, either in synchrony or diachrony.
Over the last forty years, Sir John Baker has written on most aspects of English legal history, and this collection of his writings includes many papers that have been widely cited. Providing points of reference and foundations for further research, the papers cover the legal profession, the inns of court and chancery, legal education, legal institutions, legal literature, legal antiquities, public law and individual liberty, criminal justice, private law (including contract, tort and restitution) and legal history in general. An introduction traces the development of some of the research represented by the papers, and cross-references and new endnotes have been added. A full bibliography of the author's works is also included.