جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه « مک منامین » در نشریات گروه « علوم انسانی »

Forensic linguistics as a branch of applied linguistics has taken place in the analysis of court discourse in the world, and newly, in the Iranian court contexts. This discipline has helped the legal language to analyze discoursal elements among the court participants. This is a mixed-methods research through which qualitative and quantitative analyses have been followed. The research was to discover pragmatic aspects of court discourse. One of these aspects was the spoken style markers (McMenamin, 2004) used by judges and defendants in Iranian criminal courts. Data were analyzed through descriptive (i.e., frequency, means, and percentages) and inferential statistics (i.e., Chi-square, X2) to compare judges' and defendants' conversations. Analysis of the “spoken style” variable showed that defendants' and judges' spoken styles differed significantly. The judges use the “use of formal spoken style” discourse markers more than the defendants. In sum, results revealed that judges and defendants used each discourse marker differently to play a role in strengthening or weakening speakers' power. Implications of the study suggest several guidelines for training judges in pre-service and in-service courses that provide them with linguistic and discoursal knowledge of how to use language pragmatically and practically to smooth the court processes.

This study is conducted through a descriptive classification of interrogating defendants' spoken and written discourse in courts' conversations which has been designed based on ex post facto research. Research sample included 20 cases of criminal files gathered through available sampling method from the Archived Journals of Justice. McMenamin's (2002) Hierarchy Framework of Recognition Authenticity was used to examine stylistic and syntactic markers of defendants' spoken and written discourse. Stylistic and linguistic markers make a hierarchical model that is ranging from 1 to 9 levels. This model analyzed phonological, morphological, semantic, and syntactic clues that are unique among the defendants in the court files. The patterns concerned with that hierarchical model are resemblance, consistency, and population which are recruited to discover the criminals' spoken and written documents. The implications of this study showed that the use of this framework was successful in uncovering the criminals' identification for resemblance (50 percent), consistency (30 percent), and population (20 percent). Implications of the study suggest this framework may help the interrogators, judges, and attorneys to boost the efficacy of their profession.

Forensic linguistics refers to the scientific study of the application of language for court purposes. This interdisciplinary field of study can be regarded as a sub division of applied linguistics, which has been formed, based on the individuals' needs to communicate legal interactions. It needs theoretical linguistics to determine the study of intended meaning of the language in the court. The courts may need to identify the written and spoken identity of the accused persons through authentic studies. Thus, this research investigated the criminals' spoken and written authorship in the court through Menamin's (2002) approach. This study is conducted through descriptive method and analysis of court documents to arrive at the identification of the criminal spoken and written authorship in the courts. Analyzing the two cases of written and spoken documents in the courts revealed that spoken and written discourse markers might display the identity of the criminal person. McMenamin's model was used to analyze the criminal persons' linguistics and stylistics variables that lead to their identification. These markers may be procedural steps like phonological, morphological, semantic and syntactic clues that are unique among the communities and even people in the context of the courts. Verbal and non-verbal communications could be analyzed based on the proposed model discussed in this study. The court clues could be matched with the McMenamin's principles in discovering the criminal spoken and written authorship. The implications of this study may help the interrogators, judges and attorneys to do the job fairly.

This study investigated the linguistic norms in forensic discourse of judge-defendant in criminal courts of the Islamic Republic of Iran and focused on the frequency and the percentage of verbal deviations in the judge and the accused person. The research tool was McMennamin’s (2002) linguistic model concerning the linguistic prescriptive, and descriptive deviations from the linguistic norms. Data were collected through observing fifty 10-minute video clips of Karbaschi’s defendants as the former mayor in Tehran. The data were analyzed statistically through descriptive statistics. Findings were divided into three categories of verbal norms: standard, change and deviation. The findings indicated indicated that usage of words through non-standard language have a vital role in representing the defendant's social status While the judge followed standard norms, Karbaschi changed and deviated from the norms more significantly than the judge did. Findings of the study suggest that forensic discourse implicitly depicts hierarchical level, superordinate and subordinate’s structures within the linguistic community. Social distance determines the formality of situational context while power and solidarity affect people’s interactional communications. Thus, the analysis of judges and accused persons' speeches can lead to identifying the linguistic norms which are correlated to their use of discourse.in the court specifies their individual, social, and forensic status.