眾所周知,法庭審判在司法過程中占有重要的地位。同樣,庭審會(huì)話在審判中也起著舉足輕重的作用。作為法律職業(yè)者,法官、公訴人、律師在庭審中的語言技巧為研究司法公正及平等提供了重要的素材和線索。由于社會(huì)地位,教育背景,機(jī)構(gòu)話語等因素的影響,法官、公訴人及律師往往較被告人和證人有較大的話語權(quán)。話語策略便是體現(xiàn)之一。本文從會(huì)話策略、話輪轉(zhuǎn)換、話題控制等角度,既微觀地分析了語言預(yù)設(shè)信息和信息焦點(diǎn)的錯(cuò)位原因,又宏觀地揭示了話語權(quán)力和打斷現(xiàn)象的深層根源。本研究共分六部分。第一章簡略介紹了法律語言學(xué)的研究現(xiàn)狀并指出目前國內(nèi)研究重點(diǎn);本文研究素材的采集方式,研究方法及預(yù)期目標(biāo)。第二章為文獻(xiàn)綜述,主要介紹了國內(nèi)外法庭話語的研究現(xiàn)狀和話語權(quán)力研究。第三章為理論框架,作者分別從概念、分類、原因、目前研究范圍等角度介紹了預(yù)設(shè)和打斷理論。第四章為庭審參與者包括法官、公訴人/律師、被告及證人的會(huì)話方式與特點(diǎn),為第五章對(duì)預(yù)設(shè)和打斷策略的因果分析和應(yīng)用奠定了基礎(chǔ)。第五章,作為本論文的“心臟”,作者在其中深入分析了語義預(yù)設(shè)、語用預(yù)設(shè)的策略特征和打斷位置、打斷原因、打斷后果,為庭審中被告人與證人如何反預(yù)設(shè)、反打斷提供了思路和途... 

【文章來源】：中國政法大學(xué)北京市 211工程院校 教育部直屬院校

【文章頁數(shù)】：67 頁

【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士

【文章目錄】：
Acknowledgements
Abstract
摘要
Chapter 1 Introduction
    1.1 An overview of forensic linguistics
    1.2 Data collection, research methods and expected objectives
        1.2.1 The collection and presentation of the data
        1.2.2 Research methods
        1.2.3 Expected objects
Chapter 2 Literature review
    2.1 An overview of courtroom discourse
        2.1.1 An overview of courtroom discourse abroad
        2.1.2 An overview of courtroom discourse in China
    2.2 Courtroom discourse and power
        2.2.1 The introduction to power
        2.2.2 Discourse power
Chapter 3 Theoretic framework
    3.1 An introduction to presupposition theory
        3.1.1 The definition of presupposition
        3.1.2 The classification of presupposition
        3.1.3 The research range of presupposition theory
    3.2 An introduction to interruption
        3.2.1 The definition of interruption
        3.2.2 The research field of interruption
        3.2.3 The places and causes of interruption
    3.3 Reasons to choose presupposition and interruption as the framework
Chapter 4 Speech manners and features in court trials
    4.1 Speech manners of the participants in court trials
        4.1.1 Questioning and answering
        4.1.2 Making statements
        4.1.3 Debating
        4.1.4 Giving directions
        4.1.5 Making declarations
    4.2 Speech features of the participants in court trials
        4.2.1 Speech features of the judge
        4.2.2 Speech features of the prosecutor/lawyer
        4.2.3 Speech features of the defendant
        4.2.4 Speech features of the witness
    4.3 Summary
Chapter 5 Realization of equal rights in courtroom discourse
    5.1 Realization of equal rights through breaking presuppositions
        5.1.1 Through breaking semantic presupposition
        5.1.2 Through breaking pragmatic presupposition
    5.2 Realization of equal rights through decreasing improper interruptions
        5.2.1 Through decreasing judge’s improper interruption
            5.2.1.1 Defendant interrupted by the judge
            5.2.1.2 Lawyers interrupted by the judge
            5.2.1.3 Witness interrupted by the judge
            5.2.1.4 Summary
        5.2.2 Through decreasing the prosecutor’s improper interruption
            5.2.2.1 Defendant interrupted by the prosecutor
            5.2.2.2 Witness interrupted by the prosecutor
            5.2.2.3 Summary
        5.2.3 Through decreasing the lawyer’s improper interruption
Chapter 6 Conclusions
    6.1 The summary
    6.2 The possible inspirations
    6.3 The imperfection and suggestions
Bibliography



本文編號(hào)：3396413