法庭会话中的语用推理策略

发布时间：2024-07-09 03:52

　　本文采用了语用推理的理论对法庭会话中的问答策略进行了分析，旨在发现语用推理在法庭对话中的作用，揭示了其对法庭中各方为实现各自目的所作出的有利影响，并指出可以通过一些语用策略取消其不利影响。 我们在预设理论和Grice会话含义理论基础上构建了理论框架。本文主要根据从山东省采集的法庭录音语料，分析了预设和会话含义这两种在法庭对话互动中最常用的语用推理策略。研究表明，语用推理策略在法庭对话中非常常见。在法庭会话中，各方当事人力图使话题向有利于他们自己的方向发展，人们使用“前提触发语”或者通过故意违反合作原则下的四大准则来设置语言陷阱，或者引导话题的方向。同时，通过分析，我们发现人们可以运用一些反语用推理的语言策略及时取消对自己不利的影响。 我们希望本文能够丰富语用推理的研究，有助于加深对法庭会话中预设和会话含义的理解，并有助于提高司法领域执业人员在法庭辩论中获取信息的效率。

【文章页数】：90 页

【学位级别】：硕士

【文章目录】：
DECLARATION
ABSTRACT
摘要
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Transcription Conventions
Contents
Chapter 1 Introduction
    1.1 Introduction
    1.2 The Rationale of the Study
    1.3 The Objectives of the Study
    1.4 Research Questions
    1.5 Data and Methodology
    1.6 The Organization of the Thesis
Chapter 2 Review of the Relevant Literature
    2.1 Introduction
    2.2 Previous Studies on Discourse Analysis in Courtroom Trial
        2.2.1 Studies on the Language of Mediation in Courtroom Interaction
        2.2.2 Studies on Persuasion in Courtroom Interaction
        2.2.3 Studies on Question and Questioning in Courtroom Interaction
        2.2.4 Studies on Pragmatic Strategies in Courtroom Interaction
    2.3 Studies on Presupposition
        2.3.1 Traditional Approaches to presupposition
        2.3.2 Semantic Approach to Presupposition
        2.3.3 Pragmatic Approach to Presupposition
    2.4 Studies on Conversational Implicature
        2.4.1.Grice's theory of communication and implicature
        2.4.2.The Relevance Theory Approach
        2.4.3.The Neo-Gricean Approach
    2.5.Summary
Chapter 3 Description of the Theoretical Framework
    3.1 Introduction
    3.2 The Theoretical Framework for the Present Study
    3.3 Description of the Theoretical Framework
        3.3.1 Semantic Presupposition
            3.3.1.1 Truth-Conditional Theory
            3.3.1.2 Presupposition Triggers
        3.3.2 Pragmatic Presupposition
            3.3.2.1 Felicity Conditions and Common Ground
            3.3.2.2 Defeasibility
        3.3.3 Conversational Implicature
    3.4 Summary
Chapter 4 Analysis of Pragmatic Inferences in Courtroom Interaction
    4.1 Introduction
    4.2 Presupposition in Courtroom Interaction
        4.2.1 Semantic Presupposition
            4.2.1.1 Presupposition of Truth Conditional Theory
            4.2.1.2 Presupposition Triggers
        4.2.2 Pragmatic Presupposition
            4.2.2.1 Felicity Conditions
            4.2.2.2 Defcasibility
    4.3 Conversational Implicature in Courtroom Interaction
        4.3.1 Violation of Quality Maxim
        4.3.2 Violation of Quantity Maxim
        4.3.3 Violation of Relation Maxim
        4.3.4 Violation of Manner Maxim
    4.4 Summary
Chapter 5 Conclusion
    5.1 Summary of the Present Study
    5.2 Conclusion
    5.3 Implications
    5.4 Limitations and Suggestions for Further Study
References



本文编号：4004349