本文選題：刑事庭審　切入點：話語分析　出處：《上海外國語大學》2009年碩士論文

【摘要】： 語言是人類最重要的交際和傳遞信息工具,在不同環(huán)境中使用便形成了不同的領域性語言。法律語言是語言在法律領域應用的一種機構性語言,有自己特有的特點。根據(jù)其不同的特點,又可以分為立法語言、司法語言和執(zhí)法語言等。本文是以刑事庭審中的話語為研究對象,所以,屬于司法語言。司法語言包括庭審所用語言和判決所用語言。法庭審判是最重要的法律活動之一,法庭審判的結果往往事關當事人的生命、自由、財產(chǎn)利益等,特別是刑事庭審。由于刑事審判本身對當事人權益影響的力度最大,國家強制力介入的程度最深,其庭審方式有著不同于其他訴訟的特殊性質。因此,研究刑事庭審中的話語現(xiàn)象,有著十分重要的理論意義和實踐意義。 本文以Sperber和Willson的關聯(lián)理論為指導,結合會話分析方法來研究刑事庭審話語。首先,介紹了話語、話語分析、刑事庭審話語分析等基本概念,以及刑事庭審的過程。其次,分析了刑事庭審中的話輪和相鄰對,并對庭審各角色啟動相鄰對的比例進行了定量分析。從中可以看出話語權在各角色中的分配。通過分析,我們得出結論:審判長在庭審中的權勢是最大的,其不僅主持整個庭審過程,而且決定最終的判決結果;公訴人在庭審事實的調查階段發(fā)揮著很重要的作用,其話語權也很大;由于我國現(xiàn)行法律制度的限制,律師在刑事庭審中的話語權相對較小;而被告人由于訴訟身份的特殊性,其話語權更小。再次,我們以關聯(lián)理論為指導分析了刑事庭審中話語的關聯(lián)性,關聯(lián)理論承認語境的大小,認為語境并不是靜態(tài)的,而是動態(tài)的。在較小的語境中并不關聯(lián)的話語,在較大的語境中卻能找到關聯(lián),在案件事實調查的階段,大小語境之說有著重要的策略作用。另外,通過語料分析我們發(fā)現(xiàn),在刑事庭審中,一些推理并沒有嚴格的邏輯形式,而是借助認知語境的一種關聯(lián)推理,我們在文中,也通過具體的案例進行了論證。最后,我們對刑事庭審中的話語沖突——打斷和重復,進行了分析,并總結了刑事庭審中各角色所使用的言語策略及其言語特點。
[Abstract]:Language is the most important tool for communication and information transmission.Legal language is an institutional language used in the field of law, which has its own characteristics.According to its different characteristics, it can be divided into legislative language, judicial language and law enforcement language.This article takes the discourse in the criminal trial as the research object, therefore, belongs to the judicial language.The judicial language includes the language used in the trial and the language used in the judgment.Court trial is one of the most important legal activities. The result of court trial is often related to the life, freedom, property interests of the parties concerned, especially the criminal trial.Because the criminal trial itself has the greatest influence on the rights and interests of the parties, and the state forces intervene the most, its trial mode is different from other litigation.Therefore, it is of great theoretical and practical significance to study the phenomenon of discourse in criminal trial.Under the guidance of the relevance theory of Sperber and Willson, this paper studies the criminal trial discourse with the conversational analysis method.First of all, it introduces the basic concepts of discourse, discourse analysis and criminal trial discourse analysis, as well as the process of criminal trial.Secondly, the paper analyzes the speech wheel and adjacent pairs in the criminal trial, and makes quantitative analysis on the proportion of the adjacent pairs initiated by each role in the trial.From this, we can see the distribution of discourse right in each role.Through analysis, we conclude that the presiding judge is the most powerful judge in the trial, who not only presides over the whole trial process, but also decides the final judgment result; the public prosecutor plays a very important role in the investigation of the facts of the trial.Because of the limitation of our country's current legal system, the lawyer's right to speak in criminal trial is relatively small, and the defendant's right of speech is even smaller because of the particularity of litigation status.Thirdly, under the guidance of relevance theory, we analyze the relevance of discourse in criminal trial. Relevance theory acknowledges the size of context and holds that context is not static, but dynamic.In the small context, the irrelevant discourse can be found in the larger context. In the stage of case investigation, the theory of large or small context plays an important role in strategy.In addition, through the corpus analysis, we find that in criminal court, some reasoning does not have strict logical form, but with the help of a kind of relevance reasoning of cognitive context. In this paper, we also demonstrate it through concrete cases.Finally, we analyze the conflict of words in the criminal trial-interruptions and repetition, and summarize the speech strategies used by the various characters in the criminal trial and their speech characteristics.
【學位授予單位】：上海外國語大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2009
【分類號】：D90-055;D915.3

【引證文獻】

相關碩士學位論文 前1條

1 金建宇;[D];中國政法大學;2010年

，

本文編號：1692200