Examining Discoursal Patterns among Judges and Defendants in Criminal Courts

Document Type : Research

Authors

1 PhD in General Linguistics, Department of Linguistics, Abadan Branch, Islamic Azad University, Iran

2 AAssociate Professor of ELT, Department of linguistics, Abadan Branch, Islamic Azad University, Abadan. Iran

Abstract

The use of language and its elements is one of the appropriate tools in describing and detecting crime in the courts (Aghagolzadeh, 2012, 2013). The present study aimed at discovering the discoursal patterns (i.e., descriptive, descriptive and statistical) and their sub-categories (i.e., standard norm of speech, changing in the standard norm, and deviation from the standard norms of language proposed by McMenamin (2002). The purpose of this study is to identify the types of these deviations in the criminal courts. In legal communication, the judges use fewer deviations because they not only felt that they belonged to a higher social class (Coulthard, Johnson & Wright, 2017) but they also displayed their administrative power coming from their legal status (Fairclough, 1992). McMenamin notes if the accused persons belonged to the lower class of society, they could not use the standard norms of language and was drawn to deviations in the descriptive, descriptive and statistical norms of language. In this type of discourse, the personality and identity of the judges' speech may be affected by social and political power of the courts. Thus, court language as a specific register may affect the judges' conversations that can be alien to the criminal persons and accused ones. Therefore, the research question addresses the significant difference between the judges and defendants following the McMenamin's framework in using standard speech or changing and deviations from the norms of discourse in the criminal courts.

Keywords

References

  1. Afshar, T. (2008). Application of legal linguistics in criminal investigations, Kragah, 2 (3), 6 -16 [In Persian]
  2. Aghagolzadeh, F. (2012). Legal linguistics (theoretical and applied). 2nd edition. Tehran: Alam Publishing [In Persian]
  3. Aghagolzadeh, F. (2013). The role of language knowledge and power language in controlling, classifying, and managing information in legal linguistics. In F. Aghagolzadeh (Ed.), Proceedings of the First National Conference on Legal Linguistics, Legal Discourse Analysis (pp. 13-34). Tehran: Persian Publishing [In Persian].
  4. Arrigo, B. (1996). The contours of psychiatric justice: A postmodern critique of mental illness. Criminal Insanity and the Law. New York: Garland Publishing.
  5. Bagheri, F. (2014). Conceptual study and norm functions. Biannual Journal of Islamic Perspective on Educational Science, 2 (3), 51-69. [In Persian]
  6. Bashiriyeh, H. (2000). An introduction to the sociology of modernity. Qom: Qom Seminary Islamic Propaganda Office. [In Persian]
  7. Coulthard, M, & Johnson, A. (2007). An introduction to forensic linguistics: Language in evidence. London and New York: Routledge.
  8. Coulthard, M., & Johnson, A. (2010). The Routledge handbook of forensic linguistics. UK: Routledge Publication.
  9. Coulthard, M., Johnson, A., & Wright, D. (2017). An introduction to forensic linguistics: Language in evidence. UK: Routledge Publication.
  10. Elsan, E., & Manouchehri, M. R. (2018). The procedure of discovery and provide of evidence in cyberspace. Criminal Law Research, 2(18), 30-37. [In Persian]
  11. Fairclough, N. (1992). Critical language awareness. London: Longman.
  12. Fairclough, N. (2010). Critical discourse analysis: The Critical Study of Language.1nd edition. London: Routledge.
  13. Gibbons, J. (2003). Forensic linguistics: An introduction to language in the justice system. Cambridge: Blackwell.
  14. Grice, H.P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In Peter Cole and Jerry Morgan (Eds.), Syntax and semantics.Vol.3: Speech acts (pp.43-58). New York: Academic Press.
  15. Groot, G.R. (2003). Language and law. The Netherlands: Masstricht University Press.
  16. Habibi, Hassan (1995). Legal language, Journal of the Academy, 1(1), 13-37. [In Persian]
  17. Hale, S. B. (2004). The discourse of court interpreting. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
  18. Heffer, C. (2005). The language of jury trial: A corpus-aided analysis of legal–lay discourse. Basingstoke/New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
  19. Heydon, G. (2004). Establishing the structure of police evidentiary interviews with suspects. The International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law, 11 (1), 28-49.
  20. Heydon, G. (2005). The language of police interviewing: A critical analysis. Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan.
  21. Hymes, D. (1962). The ethnography of speaking. In T. Gladwin and W. C. Sturdevant (Eds.), Anthropology and human behavior (pp.15-23). The Hague: Mouton de Gruyer.
  22. Lara, L.F. (1979). El concepto de norma en linguistica. Mexico: El Colegio de Mexico.
  23. Leech, G. (1983). Principles of pragmatics. London: Longman.
  24. Levinson, S.  (1983). Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  25. McMenamin, G. (2002). Forensic linguistics: Advances in forensic stylistics. London: CRC Press.
  26. Modarresi, Y. (1989). An introduction to sociology of language. Tehran: Institute of Cultural Studies and Research. [In Persian]
  27. Mohseni, H., & Rezaienezhad, H. (2012). Justice and ICT progress.  Journal of Legal Studies, 4 (2), 117-142 [In Persian].
  28. Momeni, N. (2011). Linguistic analysis of language crimes in the Persian-speaking community of Iran Approach to legal linguistics. PhD dissertation, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran. [In Persian]
  29. Momeni, N., & Azizi, S. (2015).  Role of topic shift and violence of Grice principles in interrogation: Forensic linguistics. Journal of Language Research, 7(16), 159-179. [In Persian]
  30. Mousavi, F., Mousavi, M., & Ramezani, A. (2011). The role of judicial linguistics in the realization of judicial justice, Journal of Comparative Law, 7 (2), 3- 24. [In Persian]
  31. Nowrouzi, N. (2007). Understanding the charge in Iran's criminal regulations, Law Enforcement Quarterly, 9 (3), 168 179. [In Persian]
  32. Razavian, H., & Jalilidoab, M.(2017). Analysis of linguistic features of swindler: Case study of Semnan Province, language and Linguistics Journal, 13 (26), 133-163. [In Persian]
  33. Sabri, M., Estaji, A., & Eliassy, ​​M. (2018). Analysis of the police-accused discourse in the field of legal social linguistics, Journal of Social Linguistics, 2(1), 99 109. [In Persian]
  34. Shamloo, B., & Abdollahi, A. (2015). Results of criminology based-management in criminal procedure.  Journal of Criminal Law Research, 6 (2), 99-128. [In Persian]
  35. van Dijk, T. A. (1993). Principles of critical discourse analysis. Discourse and Society, 4(2), 249-283.
  36. White, R., & Hines, F. (2013). Criminology and criminology. Textbook of theories of crime and perversion. (Ali Salimi, Trans.) Qom: Seminary and University Research Institute [In Persian].
  37. Widdowson, H. G. (1995). Discourse analysis: A critical view. Language and Literature, 4(3), 157-172.
ZABANPAZHUHI (Journal of Language Research)
Volume 14, Issue 45
January 2023
Pages 33-61

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics