用语言学预设理论解析法庭询问

发布时间：2018-05-09 05:54

本文选题：预设 + 预设触发语　；参考：《辽宁大学》2012年硕士论文

【摘要】：法律语言学自二十世纪七十年代以来，已经发展成为一门相对独立的学科。语言学者和法律专家都对法律语言学这一语言与法律的交叉领域产生了浓厚的兴趣；相应的研究范围也在迅速扩大。语言学的许多领域都与法律语言相关联，预设理论也不例外。有证据表明，在法庭询问中法官、公诉人及律师经常在提问中使用预设来获取信息，检验证人及被告人证言的可信度。但是，很少有研究系统地探讨预设在法庭询问中的使用情况。预设起源于哲学领域，最早由德国哲学家弗雷格提出，之后进入语言学领域成为语言学中的一个重要概念。预设在一般意义上是指对话参与者共享的背景信息，说话人认为此背景信息是真实存在的事情或命题。本研究以法庭询问中的预设为对象，在揭示法庭询问特征的同时，集中探讨了律师是如何运用预设这一语言策略进行意义操纵来表达自己的观点，以及证人如何破解虚假预设。由于预设具有主观性、隐含性和否定不改变其本身等属性，对于隐含预设的问话，不论是肯定还是否定的直接回答都意味着承认或接受了该预设内容。正是这些特点使预设陷阱成为可能，使预设成为律师在法庭询问证人时一种常用的语言策略。当律师对预设的真假有意进行控制，若证人不假思索直接回答就会落入圈套，相当于承认或接受了该预设内容。对证人而言，如何在破解对方虚假预设的基础上阐述自己的观点并使法庭相信自己的话语就是证人答话关键之所在。当然，第一步也是最重要的一步就是首先要识别虚假预设。前人研究表明预设与一些语言结构密切相关，并且对语境非常敏感。列文森把能引发预设的语义形式称为预设的触发语。他归纳了十三种预设的触发语。这些触发语为证人识别虚假预设提供了有利的线索。本论文采用定性方法结合两个案例，从话语分析、心理语言学尤其是语用学预设分析的角度剖析了律师为什么以及怎样通过预设来操纵问话，并且通过对两个案例中两名证人答话的对比分析，归纳并提出了破解预设陷阱的原则、方法和具体的步骤。本文由导论、正文和结论三部分组成。主要内容如下：第一部分是导论。导论部分主要介绍了本研究的背景、研究对象、研究方法、数据收集，回顾了法律语言学及预设的相关研究情况，分析了本研究的实际及理论意义。第二部分是正文，分为三章：第一章是文献综述，分析总结了法庭询问的特点；在回顾不同时期预设理论的基础上，提出了本研究采用的预设定义；列举了预设的主要研究方法：语义预设和语用预设及二者之间的关系；列举了预设的特征。这章整体构成本研究的理论基础。第二章对预设触发语进行了分类，归纳为由词汇引发的预设、由句子引发的预设及由语境引发的预设三类，并结合具体例子特别是在法庭询问的语境下，分析每一种预设触发语是如何生成预设的。第三章结合真实的法庭审判笔录，，主要运用预设理论详细分析了律师在法庭询问中是如何利用预设来诱导、逼迫、甚至是欺骗对方证人作出有利己方的证词，从而达成赢得审判的目的。在对比分析两个案例中两名证人答话的基础上，为证人指出如何识别虚假预设以及如何消除不利预设的步骤和具体方法。第三部分是结论，总结了本研究的主要成果，指出了本研究的不足之处并对未来研究给出了一些建议。
[Abstract]:Since the 1970s , legal linguistics has developed into a relatively independent subject . Both linguistic scholars and legal experts have strong interest in the intersection of legal linguistics and law .
The corresponding scope of the study is also expanding rapidly . Many of the fields of linguistics are associated with legal languages , and there is no exception . There is evidence that judges , prosecutors and lawyers often use presets in questioning to obtain information , to verify the credibility of the person and the accused . However , there are few studies systematically exploring the use of presets in court inquiries .

Presupposition originated in the field of philosophy , first proposed by German philosopher Frege , and then entered the field of linguistics to become an important concept in linguistics .

The first step is to recognize or accept the preset content . The first step is to recognize and accept the preset content . In the case of a witness , how to set the preset semantic form is closely related to the language structure and is very sensitive to the context .

This thesis adopts qualitative method to combine two cases , from the angle of discourse analysis , psycholinguistics , especially pragmatics , to analyze the reason of lawyer and how to manipulate the question through the preset , and to summarize and put forward the principle , method and concrete steps of solving the pre - set trap through the comparative analysis of two witness statements in two cases .

This paper consists of three parts : Introduction , text and conclusion . The main contents are as follows :

The first part is the introduction . The introduction part mainly introduces the background , research object , research method and data collection of this study , reviews the relevant research situation of law linguistics and preset , and analyses the practical and theoretical significance of this study .

The second part is the text , divided into three chapters :

The first chapter is the literature review , the analysis summarizes the characteristics of the court inquiry ;
On the basis of reviewing the pre - set theory of different periods , the preset definition adopted in this study is put forward .
The main research methods are listed : the semantic and pragmatic and the relationship between them ;
List the pre - set features . The whole constitution constitutes the theoretical basis of this study .

In the second chapter , the preset trigger language is classified into three categories , which are caused by vocabulary , pre - set by sentence and pre - set by context , and how each preset trigger is generated in the context of questioning by the court , especially in the context of the inquiry of the court .

Chapter Three discusses how to use the preset theory to analyze the lawyer ' s testimony of how to use the preset to induce , force and even deceive the other party ' s witnesses in the inquiry of the court to achieve the purpose of winning the trial . On the basis of the two witness statements in the two cases , the steps and the specific methods of how to identify the false presets and how to eliminate adverse presets are given for the witness .

The third part is the conclusion , summarizes the main results of the study , points out the shortcomings of the study and gives some suggestions for future research .

【学位授予单位】：辽宁大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2012
【分类号】：D90-055

【相似文献】