法庭交叉询问中证词导出的语用策略研究

发布时间：2018-05-24 22:26

本文选题：交叉询问 + 证词导出　；参考：《中南民族大学》2009年硕士论文

【摘要】： 庭审交际是法庭对立双方在心理、语言、语用和法理方面的对抗。在论证和询问过程中,语用策略的恰当运用可以左右法官和陪审团对案情的判断。因此,无论是法律工作者还是法律语言学家都有必要更加重视法庭的语言使用,特别是在交叉询问阶段律师为导出证词而使用的语言。然而,国内在此方面的研究仍属静态描写而非动态观察。本文在语用学和会话分析理论的基础上试图对法庭交叉询问阶段产生的会话进行定性分析,旨在探索律师在此阶段为证词导出而采取的可行性语用策略。交叉询问阶段所涉及的语用策略有微观和宏观之分。微观语用策略主要体现在语音、词汇、句法和修辞层面。宏观语用策略则指受心理、人际和会话因素影响的策略。宏观策略是本文的研究重点,因为它们为庭审交际所特有。宏观策略中,心理控制可在庭前和庭审过程中实现,如为了透彻了解证人的心理状态而与之建立有利关系,盘问证人时作有罪或无罪预设、并以此对法官和陪审团的潜意识施加影响,掩盖律师本人的真实提问意图,自控负面情绪,将听众的注意力引向利己的信息或证据等。人际策略的目的在于通过行使或放弃话语权势来控制证人或犯罪嫌疑人,通过强调证人的社会背景、头衔、学位或职业经历等来加强或削弱证词的可信度。会话策略涉及到会话结构控制,具体指引导提问走向、根据情景语境变化提问方式、诱导被询问者在无意中作出预期的回答以及对话题、逻辑、话轮和推论的控制等。本研究不仅有助于进一步理解庭审交际,也对司法理论和实践有一定的启示。然而本研究仍存许多不足,例如,由于语料收集的限制,本研究只涉及民事和刑事案件,而未涉及行政案件,而在行政案件中,被告作为政府权力机构的特殊身份使得该类案件与其它类型的案件差别较大。研究语料的偏颇在一定程度上削弱了研究结果的客观性。
[Abstract]:Trial communication is the psychological, linguistic, pragmatic and legal confrontation between two opposing parties. In the process of argumentation and questioning, the proper use of pragmatic strategies can influence the judge and jury's judgment of the case. Therefore, it is necessary for both lawyers and legal linguists to pay more attention to the use of the language of the court, especially the language used by lawyers for the purpose of deriving testimony during the cross-examination stage. However, domestic research in this area is still static description rather than dynamic observation. Based on the theories of pragmatics and conversational analysis, this paper attempts to make a qualitative analysis of the conversations generated in the cross-examination stage of the court, in order to explore the feasible pragmatic strategies adopted by lawyers in this stage for the induction of testimony. The pragmatic strategies involved in the cross-examination stage are divided into micro and macro aspects. Micro-pragmatic strategies are mainly embodied in phonological, lexical, syntactic and rhetorical aspects. Macro-pragmatic strategies refer to strategies that are influenced by psychological, interpersonal and conversational factors. Macro-strategy is the focus of this paper, because they are unique to trial communication. In macro strategy, psychological control can be realized in the course of trial and trial, such as establishing favorable relationship with witnesses in order to understand their psychological state thoroughly, presupposing guilt or innocence in cross-examination of witnesses. It also exerts influence on the subconscious mind of the judge and the jury, conceals the lawyer's real questioning intention, controls the negative emotion, and directs the attention of the audience to the self-interested information or evidence, and so on. The purpose of interpersonal strategy is to control witnesses or criminal suspects by exercising or giving up the power of discourse, and to strengthen or weaken the credibility of testimony by emphasizing the social background, title, degree or professional experience of witnesses. Conversational strategy refers to the control of conversational structure, which refers to the direction of questioning, changing the way of questioning according to the context of the situation, inducing the questioner to give the expected answer inadvertently, and controlling the topic, logic, turn and inference, and so on. This study is not only helpful for further understanding of trial communication, but also enlightens judicial theory and practice. However, there are still many shortcomings in this study. For example, due to the limitations of corpus collection, this study only deals with civil and criminal cases, not administrative cases, and in administrative cases, The defendant's special status as a government authority makes this kind of cases different from other types of cases. The bias of the research corpus weakens the objectivity of the research results to some extent.
【学位授予单位】：中南民族大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2009
【分类号】：H030;D90-055

【相似文献】