中美刑事案件二审判决书中态度资源的比较研究

发布时间：2018-05-31 05:04

本文选题：中美二审刑事判决书 + 评价理论　；参考：《华中师范大学》2017年硕士论文

【摘要】：法律语言学是语言学的一门跨学科性分支,它系统地、科学地研究法律语言。在过去的半个多世纪里,法律语言学在国内外迅速地发展,成为了语言学研究热点之一。由于语言在法律中起着重要作用,法律语言学吸引了来自众多领域的学者的兴趣;法律语言学的研究不仅拓宽了语言学理论的适用范围,也为法律工作提供了启发。本研究以评价理论中的态度子系统为理论框架,通过自建语料库,采用定性定量相结合的方法,比较研究中美二审刑事判决书中态度资源的特点。态度系统是评价理论三大子系统之一,是语言人际元功能的重要组成部分。自从评价理论创立以来,它就被广泛应用于语篇分析,如新闻语篇分析以及历史文本分析。但是对于判决书中的态度资源的研究似乎还很欠缺。本研究的语料包含中国及美国的二审刑事判决书各八篇,其来源合法可信;语料共计九万二千余字。通过对中美二审刑事判决书中评价资源的详细描写,并进行比较,研究发现,两种判决书中的态度资源的共同点为:(一)绝大多数是判断和鉴赏资源,情感资源使用极少,;而在情感资源中,又以渴望资源为主。(二)态度资源都以否定态度为主。(三)态度资源的主要来源均为上诉法院及上诉人,上诉法院的态度中肯定态度多于否定态度,上诉人的态度则几乎都是否定的。其差异表现在:(一)在美国判决书中,上诉人利用否定的判断资源来指责原审法院及其法官在原审判决中犯了错误,而在中国的判决书中,上诉人并未直接针对原审法院或原审法院的法官的行为做出评价,而是利用否定的鉴赏资源来评价原审判决书。(二)在美国判决书中未发现对上诉人的肯定的判断资源,而在中国判决书中,包括原审法院、上诉人以及上诉法院在内的各方都用了肯定的判断资源来表示对上诉人归案后的合作行为的认可。(三)中国判决书中有对案件事实的评价,但在美国判决书中没有。对于产生这些异同的原因,我们认为,中美二审刑事判决书中态度资源具有相同之处,是因为二者属于同一语域,其语域变量相同或相似;而其差异则主要来源于中美两国法律体系的不同以及文化传统的不同。本研究证明评价理论同样适用于判决书中评价资源的分析,并为描写中美二审刑事判决书中的评价资源做出了一定的贡献。
[Abstract]:Forensic linguistics is an interdisciplinary branch of linguistics, which systematically and scientifically studies legal language. In the past half century, forensic linguistics has developed rapidly both at home and abroad and has become one of the hotspots in linguistics research. As language plays an important role in law, forensic linguistics attracts the interest of scholars from many fields. The study of legal linguistics not only broadens the scope of application of linguistic theory, but also provides inspiration for legal work. This study takes the attitude subsystem of evaluation theory as the theoretical framework, through the self-built corpus, using the method of qualitative and quantitative analysis, compares the characteristics of attitude resources in the second instance criminal judgment between China and the United States. Attitude system is one of the three subsystems of evaluation theory and an important part of interpersonal metafunctions. Since the establishment of evaluation theory, it has been widely used in discourse analysis, such as news discourse analysis and historical text analysis. But the study of attitude resources in the judgment seems to be lacking. The corpus of this study consists of eight criminal judgments of second instance in China and eight in the United States, whose sources are legal and credible, with a total of more than 92000 words. Through a detailed description of the evaluation resources in the second instance criminal judgment between China and the United States, and a comparison between them, it is found that the common denominator of the two judgments' attitude resources is that the majority of the two judgments are judgment and appreciation resources. Emotional resources are seldom used; in emotional resources, they are mainly craving resources. (2) attitude resources are dominated by negative attitudes. (3) the main sources of attitude resources are the Court of Appeal and the appellant. The positive attitude of the Court of Appeal is more than that of the negative attitude, and the attitude of the appellant is almost all negative. The difference is manifested in: (1) in the US judgment, the appellant used negative judgment resources to accuse the original trial court and its judges of having made mistakes in the original judgment, while in the Chinese judgment, The appellant did not directly evaluate the behavior of the judge in the original court or the original court, but made use of the negative appreciation resources to evaluate the original judgment. (2) in the United States judgment, no positive judgment resources for the appellant have been found, while in the Chinese judgment, the original trial court has been included in the judgment, Appellants and appellants, including the Court of Appeal, have used positive judgment resources to express their approval of the appellants' cooperation after they have been brought to justice. There is an evaluation of the facts of the case in the Chinese judgment, but not in the US judgment. For the reasons of these similarities and differences, we think that the attitude resources in the second instance criminal judgment of China and the United States have the same place, because they belong to the same register, and their register variables are the same or similar; The differences are mainly from the differences of legal systems and cultural traditions between China and the United States. This study proves that the evaluation theory is also applicable to the analysis of evaluation resources in the judgment, and has made a certain contribution to the description of the evaluation resources in the criminal judgment of the second instance between China and the United States.
【学位授予单位】：华中师范大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：D971.2;DD915.3;D925.2

【参考文献】