近年來，一些重大商業(yè)詐欺案件的曝光極大地動(dòng)搖了投資者對(duì)于公司治理信息披露制度的信心，并最終導(dǎo)致對(duì)管理層職業(yè)道德的質(zhì)疑。商業(yè)詐欺的危害僅在于損害投資者的利益，而且由于案件的復(fù)雜性和涉案人員的刻意誤導(dǎo)，給類“白領(lǐng)犯罪”案件的審判造成很多困難。為了體現(xiàn)司法公正，有關(guān)人士呼吁除立法堵漏外，應(yīng)考慮采用其它行之有效的手段來揭露詐欺的真相。語言學(xué)分析作為證據(jù)鑒定的手段之一受到了重視。本文討論了文體分析研究應(yīng)用于揭露證詞欺騙的可能性及相應(yīng)的文體標(biāo)記。 本文前三章論述了司法語言學(xué)中的文體分析及方法，并列舉了常用的定性及定量分析標(biāo)記。第四章介紹了應(yīng)用文體分析揭示欺騙的各家學(xué)說及成果。本文的重點(diǎn)在第五章。以安然能源和寰球電訊兩宗震驚世界的商業(yè)詐欺案聽證會(huì)筆錄為研究對(duì)象，綜合四項(xiàng)文體分析研究成果，列出商業(yè)詐欺案件疑犯證詞中出現(xiàn)頻率最高的八個(gè)文體標(biāo)記，通過科學(xué)的統(tǒng)計(jì)分析發(fā)現(xiàn)，其中五個(gè)標(biāo)記的使用與欺騙有關(guān)，并且某些標(biāo)記同時(shí)出現(xiàn)的可能性較高，因此可以作為揭示欺騙的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。進(jìn)一步的研究表明，這五個(gè)標(biāo)記同時(shí)使用時(shí)揭示欺騙的準(zhǔn)確率遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)高于單個(gè)標(biāo)記。論文的總結(jié)部分指出該研究結(jié)果的局限性和該領(lǐng)域?qū)淼难芯糠较颉?nbsp;

【文章來源】：對(duì)外經(jīng)濟(jì)貿(mào)易大學(xué)北京市 211工程院校 教育部直屬院校

【文章頁數(shù)】：76 頁

【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士

【文章目錄】：
1 Introduction
2 Stylistic Analysis and Its Application in forensic Field
    2.1 Forensic Stylistics and Its Implications
    2.2 Demarcation of Forensic Stylistics in Terms of Methodology
        2.2.1 Evaluative Stylistics
            2.2.1.1 Prescriptive Stylistics
            2.2.1.2 Intuitive Stylistics
        2.2.2 Objective Stylistics
            2.2.2.1 Descriptive Stylistics
            2.2.2.2 Quantitative Stylistics 9 2.2.3 Combined Approaches to Stylistic Analysis
    2.3 Stylistic Analysis as Evidence in Legal Setting 13 3 The Search for Deceptive Stylistic Indicators
3 TheSearchfordeceptiveStylisticIndicators
    3.1 Characteristics of deceptive Linguistic Style
    3.2 Linguistic Style as More Reliable Indicators
        3.2.1 the Location of Specific Stylistic Indicators
        3.2.2 Particles as Indicators of Deception 20 4 Different Schools of Deception Detection Approaches
4 DifferentSchoolsofDeceptionDetectionApproach
    4.1 Statement Validity Analysis
        4.1.1 the Structured Interview
        4.1.2 the Content Analysis
        4.1.3 he Validity Checklist
    4.2 Reality Monitoring
        4.2.1 the Selected Criteria
        4.2.2 Evaluation of Reality Monitoring
    4.3 Sapir s SCAN Training Program
        4.3.1 Lengthier Introductions
        4.3.2 Unnecessary Connectors
        4.3.3 Pronoun Deviations
            4.3.3.1 the Pronoun 'I'
            4.3.3.2 I versus We
            4.3.3.3 the Pronoun 'we'
            4.3.3.4 Possessive Pronouns 33 4.4 Lexical Diversity
    4.4 IexicalDiversity
        4.4.1 the Calculation of TTR
        4.4.2 Two conflicting Theories
        4.4.3 Implication of TTR as Forensic Evidence
        4.4.4 Advantages of TTR
5 Research on Deceptive Stylistic Indicators
    5.1 Design of the Research
        5.1.1 Purpose
        5.1.2 Method
            5.1.2.1 Pre-supposition of the Sample Transcripts
            5.1.2.2 Criteria for the Selection of Stylistic Indicators in the Sample Transcription
        5.1.3 Procedures
        5.1.4 Software Used as Research Tool
        5.1.5 Standards Used to Determine Deception in Sample Transcripts43 5.2 Research Findings
    5.2 Research Findings
        5.2.1 Criteria Collected from Sample Transcripts at First Stage
            5.2.1.1 Sample Data
            5.2.1.2 Data Analysis
6 Conclusion
Appendix 1
Appendix 2
Appendix 3
Appendix 4
Bibliography


【參考文獻(xiàn)】：
期刊論文
[1]法律語言學(xué)的研究方法[J]. 吳偉平.  當(dāng)代語言學(xué). 2002(01)
[2]法律語言心理學(xué)的定位及研究狀況[J]. 杜金榜.  現(xiàn)代外語. 2002(01)



本文編號(hào)：3199452