Legal Discourse: Analysis of Education and Criminal Convictions in Iranian Courts
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.
Â
Keywords: Forensic Linguistic, Cooperative Principle, Speech Act, Education, Criminal Conviction.
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
Issue
Section
License
- Papers must be submitted on the understanding that they have not been published elsewhere (except in the form of an abstract or as part of a published lecture, review, or thesis) and are not currently under consideration by another journal published by any other publisher.
- It is also the authors responsibility to ensure that the articles emanating from a particular source are submitted with the necessary approval.
- The authors warrant that the paper is original and that he/she is the author of the paper, except for material that is clearly identified as to its original source, with permission notices from the copyright owners where required.
- The authors ensure that all the references carefully and they are accurate in the text as well as in the list of references (and vice versa).
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
- The journal/publisher is not responsible for subsequent uses of the work. It is the author's responsibility to bring an infringement action if so desired by the author.
