Legal Discourse: Analysis of Education and Criminal Convictions in Iranian Courts

Authors

  • Amin Mohammadzadegan Khoyi Department of English, Tabriz Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tabriz, Iran
  • Biook Behnam Department of English, Tabriz Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tabriz, Iran

Keywords:

Forensic Linguistic, Cooperative Principle, Speech Act, Education, Criminal Conviction.

Abstract

This article assesses the role of education in criminal convictions by examining how incriminated cases violate maxim of quantity in relation to different speech acts which are used by interrogators in Iranian law courts. In this study we investigate this relationship by more than 20 incriminated cases (half of the cases educated and half of them non-educated). This research is based primarily on documents from judiciary written files. Data for this study is collected from Iran's judicial courts. We aim to show how maxim of quantity is violated in different educated and non-educated cases in relation to different speech acts. The analysis shows that non-educated cases violate maxim of quantity more than educated ones in relation to different speech acts.

 

Keywords: Forensic Linguistic, Cooperative Principle, Speech Act, Education, Criminal Conviction.

Author Biographies

Amin Mohammadzadegan Khoyi, Department of English, Tabriz Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tabriz, Iran

Amin Mohammadzadegan Khoyi is a freelance writer and researcher in Forensic Linguistics and Critical Discourse Analysis fields. He is the member of English Association at East Azarbaijan Science and Research Islamic Azad University and also Academy Edu. Online Website. His latest project is journalistic discourse analysis, he is compiling that will be published next year. He is M.A student at East Science and Research Islamic Azad University in Tabriz, Iran.

Biook Behnam, Department of English, Tabriz Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tabriz, Iran

Biook Behnam is Editor-in-Chief at The Journal of Applied Linguistics IJLTR at Member of Editorial Board, at Journal of Foreign Language Teaching Research, Member of the Editorial Board at The Journal of ASIA TEFL (The Asian Association of Teachers of English as a Foreign Language). He is Representative of Academic Assessment Committee of Tabriz University at Azarbaijan University for Teacher Education, Chairman at Research Assessment Committee of Faculty of Humanities.

References

Adams, S.H., (1996). Statement analysis: What do suspect’s words really reveal?. FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin. 65 (Oct.), pp.12-20

Adriani, Kadek G.D., Hamzah & Havid Ardi, (2013). Comparision of the maxim violation found in action and drama movies. E-Journal English Language and Literature. 1(2), pp. 69-78. Retrieved on 15 July 2014 from http://ejournal.unp.ac.id/index.php/ell/article/view/900/754

Brown, G. & Yule, G., (1983). Discourse analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Bhatia, V.K., (1994). Analysing genre: Language use in professional settings. New York: Longman Publishing.

Coulthard, R.M. & Johnson, A., (2010). The Routledge handbook of forensic linguistics’ /– 1st Ed. USA and Canada: Routledge.

Crystal, D., (2003). A Dictionary of linguistics and phonetics. USA: Blackwell Publishers.

Danet, B., (1980). Language in the legal process. Law and Society. 14(3), pp. 447-463.

Eades, D. (1994). Forensic linguistics in Australia: an overview. Forensic linguistics, 1(2), pp. 113-132.

Grice, H.P., (1975). Logic and conversation. In Cole P. & Morgan J. (eds.). Speech Acts. New York: Academic Press, pp. 41-58.

Halliday, M.A.K., (1973). Language in a social perspective: Explorations in the functions of language. London: Edward Arnold.

Levi, J.N. (1993). Evaluating jury comprehension of the Illinois capital sentencing instructions. American speech, 68(1), pp. 1-26.

Liptak, (2001). A. legally, the alphabet isn’t as simple as A, B, C. The New York Times. September 2, 2001, Sec. 4, p. 10.

Mohammadzadegan K., A. (2014). Discourse of Law: Analysis of Cooperative Principles and Speech Acts in Iranian Law Courts. (M.A thesis), Tabriz: East Azarbaijan Science and Research Branch of Islamic Azad University, Iran.

Mohammadzadegan K., A., Behnam, B. (2014). Discourse of Law: Analysis of Cooperative Principles and Speech Acts in Iranian Law Courts. Asian Journal of Education and e –Learning. 2(4), pp. 312-322

Momeni, N., (2012). Theory and practice in language studies. Academy Publisher. 2 (6), pp.1263-1269. doi:10.4304/tpls.2.6.1263-1269

Olsson, J. (2004). Forensic linguistics: an introduction to language, crime and the law. London: Continuum.

Schiffrin, A., (2005). Modeling Speech Acts in Conversational Discourse. (Doctoral dissertation), Leeds: The University of Leeds, U.K.

Searle, J. R. (1969). Speech acts: an essay in the philosophy of language. London: Cambridge University Press.

Searle, J. R. (1979). Expression and meaning: Studies in the theory of speech acts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Searle, J. R. &Vandervekan, D. (1985). Foundations of illocutionary logic. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Downloads

Published

2014-12-15

How to Cite

Mohammadzadegan Khoyi, A., & Behnam, B. (2014). Legal Discourse: Analysis of Education and Criminal Convictions in Iranian Courts. Asian Journal of Education and E-Learning, 2(6). Retrieved from https://ajouronline.com/index.php/AJEEL/article/view/1859