本文選題：人際功能　切入點(diǎn)：權(quán)力　出處：《西南大學(xué)》2009年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】： 本文分析了美國(guó)兩宗著名案件(911穆薩維案件和辛普森案件)的部分交叉質(zhì)詢庭審記錄,旨在揭示美國(guó)法庭詢問中話語(yǔ)與權(quán)力的關(guān)系以及律師是如何通過語(yǔ)言對(duì)證人進(jìn)行主導(dǎo)和控制的。 法律語(yǔ)言學(xué)作為一門邊緣學(xué)科,正逐漸吸引來自跨學(xué)科研究者們的注意。而法庭交叉質(zhì)詢作為整個(gè)審訊的中心,不可避免地成為法律專家和語(yǔ)言學(xué)家的關(guān)注焦點(diǎn)。近二十年來,國(guó)內(nèi)外很多學(xué)者從會(huì)話分析,語(yǔ)用學(xué)以及批判性語(yǔ)篇分析等多個(gè)不同角度對(duì)法庭庭審會(huì)話進(jìn)行了深入研究,并取得了較豐碩的成果。然而,他們更多的是從社會(huì)和語(yǔ)用的角度來觀察研究交叉質(zhì)詢,很少有人從功能語(yǔ)言學(xué)層面進(jìn)行研究探討。眾所周知,在法庭辯論中,律師會(huì)運(yùn)用各種語(yǔ)言策略來引導(dǎo)并且控制證人,從而體現(xiàn)了法律專業(yè)人士和非專業(yè)人士之間有著不平衡的權(quán)力關(guān)系。因此,本文作者嘗試使用韓禮德功能語(yǔ)法中的人際功能,對(duì)交叉質(zhì)詢進(jìn)行解讀。 作為三大元功能之一的人際功能是指語(yǔ)言除了傳遞信息之外還具有表達(dá)講話者的身份、地位、態(tài)度、動(dòng)機(jī)等的功能。這一功能主要來幫助講話者建立和維持社會(huì)關(guān)系。人際功能可以通過選擇網(wǎng)路在詞匯和語(yǔ)法系統(tǒng)中反映出來,以語(yǔ)氣和情態(tài)等形式體現(xiàn)。而正如人際功能的本質(zhì)所表現(xiàn)的,它能在法庭英語(yǔ)的互動(dòng)(交叉質(zhì)詢)得到最好的體現(xiàn)。通過研究發(fā)現(xiàn),問句、時(shí)態(tài)、情態(tài)動(dòng)詞和情態(tài)附加語(yǔ)這些語(yǔ)言手段對(duì)法庭會(huì)話語(yǔ)篇人際意義的實(shí)現(xiàn)起了主要作用。它們不僅能夠幫助律師在質(zhì)詢中對(duì)證人實(shí)現(xiàn)某種程度的控制,還會(huì)間接對(duì)陪審團(tuán)和法官產(chǎn)生影響。這些語(yǔ)言手段的使用也幫助法庭中各方建立和維持了一種特定的人際關(guān)系。 本文回顧了權(quán)力、交叉質(zhì)詢以及在法庭交叉質(zhì)詢中體現(xiàn)權(quán)力關(guān)系的相關(guān)研究,在此基礎(chǔ)上引入Halliday功能語(yǔ)法中三大元功能之一的人際功能。在人際功能的理論框架下,著重分析了穆薩維案件和辛普森案件中用來反映權(quán)力不對(duì)稱關(guān)系的語(yǔ)言手段,從而揭示了律師和證人之間的權(quán)力關(guān)系。本論文期望能夠?qū)Ψㄍビ⒄Z(yǔ),特別是交叉質(zhì)詢這一特定語(yǔ)篇研究領(lǐng)域有所拓展,并對(duì)于人際意義的研究有所啟示。
[Abstract]:This paper analyzes the records of two famous American cases, namely, the 911 Mousavi case and the Simpson case. The purpose of this paper is to reveal the relationship between discourse and power in American court questioning and how lawyers dominate and control witnesses through language. Forensic linguistics, as an interdisciplinary discipline, is gradually attracting the attention of interdisciplinary researchers. Inevitably, it has become the focus of attention of legal experts and linguists. In the past two decades, many scholars at home and abroad have conducted in-depth research on court session from different angles, such as conversational analysis, pragmatics and critical discourse analysis. However, most of them observe and study cross-questioning from a social and pragmatic perspective, and very few people study it from the perspective of functional linguistics. As we all know, in court arguments, Lawyers use a variety of language strategies to guide and control witnesses, thus demonstrating an unbalanced power relationship between legal professionals and non-professionals. Therefore, the author tries to use the interpersonal function in Halliday's functional grammar. The cross-question is interpreted. As one of the three metafunctions, interpersonal function means that language, in addition to transmitting information, also has the identity, status, and attitude of the speaker. The function of motivation, etc. This function is designed to help speakers build and maintain social relations. Interpersonal functions can be reflected in lexical and grammatical systems through the choice of the Internet. In the form of mood and modality. And as the essence of interpersonal function, it can be best reflected in the interaction (cross-questioning) in court English. Modal verbs and modal adjuncts play a major role in the realization of interpersonal meaning in courtroom discourse. They can not only help lawyers achieve a certain degree of control over witnesses in questioning, It also has an indirect impact on juries and judges. The use of these language tools also helps parties to establish and maintain a particular interpersonal relationship in court. This paper reviews relevant studies on power, cross-questioning and power relations in court cross-questioning, and then introduces interpersonal function, one of the three metafunctions in Halliday functional grammar, under the theoretical framework of interpersonal function. This paper focuses on the analysis of the linguistic means used to reflect the asymmetrical relationship of power in the Mousavi case and the Simpson case, thus revealing the power relationship between lawyers and witnesses. In particular, cross-questioning, a specific discourse research field, has been expanded and has implications for the study of interpersonal meaning.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：西南大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2009
【分類號(hào)】：D90-055;H313

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前3條

1 廖美珍;國(guó)外法律語(yǔ)言研究綜述[J];當(dāng)代語(yǔ)言學(xué);2004年01期

2 呂萬英;;法官話語(yǔ)的權(quán)力支配[J];外語(yǔ)研究;2006年02期

3 杜金榜;從目前的研究看法律語(yǔ)言學(xué)學(xué)科體系的構(gòu)建[J];現(xiàn)代外語(yǔ);2000年01期

，

本文編號(hào)：1609564