發(fā)布時(shí)間：2022-02-18 22:23

　　庭審中,當(dāng)原告或被告的利益受到威脅時(shí),他們會(huì)做出虛假陳述,試圖影響法官對(duì)案件的判斷,以此逃避或減輕懲罰。本文將法庭中虛假陳述的行為定義為“欺騙性言語(yǔ)行為”。欺騙性言語(yǔ)行為會(huì)影響法官的判斷,浪費(fèi)司法資源,損害社會(huì)公平和誠(chéng)信。因此,識(shí)別欺騙性言語(yǔ)行為具有重要的法律意義,它可以提高法庭審判的效率,增強(qiáng)法律體系的權(quán)威性。盡管識(shí)別欺騙是一個(gè)熱門(mén)問(wèn)題,也受到來(lái)自多個(gè)學(xué)科學(xué)者的關(guān)注,但很少有中國(guó)學(xué)者在具體的語(yǔ)境中研究這個(gè)問(wèn)題。因此,本研究旨在中國(guó)庭審問(wèn)答的語(yǔ)境下,找到能有效識(shí)別欺騙性言語(yǔ)行為的“欺騙性言語(yǔ)識(shí)別詞”。本研究共收集10個(gè)真實(shí)的庭審案件,轉(zhuǎn)寫(xiě)出28段語(yǔ)料,并對(duì)其中的19段進(jìn)行詳細(xì)分析�；趦纱箢愖R(shí)別欺騙的線索（語(yǔ)言控制,情感和認(rèn)知運(yùn)作）和10個(gè)已被證實(shí)有效的“欺騙性言語(yǔ)識(shí)別詞”,本研究搭建識(shí)別欺騙性言語(yǔ)行為的分析框架。語(yǔ)言控制使欺騙者主動(dòng)地采取策略（即隱匿、捏造和歪曲）來(lái)達(dá)到其目的,主要通過(guò)8個(gè)“欺騙性言語(yǔ)識(shí)別詞”得以實(shí)現(xiàn)（模糊詞、概括詞、強(qiáng)調(diào)詞、套話、指向他人、弱化詞、條件句和連接詞）。另外兩個(gè)“識(shí)別詞”（否定詞和重復(fù)）實(shí)現(xiàn)了情感和認(rèn)知運(yùn)作中否定態(tài)度和認(rèn)知活動(dòng)的減緩。在此框架下,本研究對(duì)... 

【文章來(lái)源】：廣東外語(yǔ)外貿(mào)大學(xué)廣東省

【文章頁(yè)數(shù)】：115 頁(yè)

【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士

【文章目錄】：
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
ABSTRACT
摘要
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION
    1.1 Rationale
    1.2 The objective and research questions
    1.3 Data collection and methodology
    1.4 Organization of the thesis
CHAPTER TWO LITERATURE REVIEW
    2.1 Definition of deception
    2.2 Psychological approaches to deception detection
    2.3 Linguistic approaches to deception detection
    2.4 Critical evaluations
CHAPTER THREE THE ANALYTICAL FRAMEWORK FOR DECEPTIONDETECTION
    3.1 Deceptive behavior as a deceptive speech act
        3.1.1 DSA as an illocutionary act
        3.1.2 DSA as an act with false information and vicious intentions
    3.2 Cues to deception
        3.2.1 Linguistic manipulation
        3.2.2 Cognitive and emotional functions
    3.3 Linguistic deception indicators(LDIs)
    3.4 The analytical framework for deception detection
CHAPTER FOUR LINGUISTIC DECEPTION INDICATORS IN CHINESECOURTROOM TRIALS
    4.1 Analysis of linguistic deception indicators in Chinese courtroom trials
    4.2 Eight linguistic deception indicators in Chinese courtroom trials
CHAPTER FIVE DETECTION OF DECEPTIVE SPEECH ACTS THROUGHLINGUISTIC DECEPTION INDICATORS
    5.1 Detection of deceptive speech acts through LDIs in terms of linguisticmanipulation
        5.1.1 Vagueness
        5.1.2 Generality
        5.1.3 References to the other
        5.1.4 Intensifiers
        5.1.5 Formulaic expressions
        5.1.6 Minimizing markers
    5.2 Detection of deceptive speech acts through linguistic deception indicators interms of cognitive and emotional functions
        5.2.1 The co-occurrence of negation and other four linguistic deceptionindicators
        5.2.2 The co-occurrence of negation,generality and intensifiers
        5.2.3 The co-occurrence of negation and references to the other
        5.2.4 The co-occurrence of negation and vagueness
        5.2.5 The co-occurrence of repetition and negation
    5.3 Summary
        5.3.1 The coding scheme of detecting deceptive speech acts
        5.3.2 A summary of deceptive strategies
CHAPTER SIX CONCLUSION
    6.1 Major findings
    6.2 Implications
    6.3 Limitations and suggestions for further study
REFERENCES
APPENDICES
    Appendix A
    Appendix B
    Appendix C


【參考文獻(xiàn)】：
期刊論文
[1]民事訴訟案件中欺騙性言語(yǔ)行為的語(yǔ)用學(xué)研究[J]. 陳林漢,徐章宏.  伊犁師范學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版). 2013(02)
[2]基于語(yǔ)言內(nèi)容的謊言識(shí)別[J]. 吳嵩,金盛華,蔡頠,李紹顓.  心理科學(xué)進(jìn)展. 2012(03)
[3]說(shuō)謊行為及其識(shí)別的心理學(xué)研究[J]. 張亭玉,張雨青.  心理科學(xué)進(jìn)展. 2008(04)
[4]非真實(shí)性話語(yǔ)研究述評(píng)[J]. 張淑玲,何自然.  現(xiàn)代外語(yǔ). 2006(01)



本文編號(hào)：3631659