Specificity of Defence Attorney’s and Prosecutor’s Indirect Communicative Influence on the Jurors during Trial (by the Material of English-Language Feature Films)
Ilyukhin Nikita Igorevich
Saratov State Law Academy
Submitted: 31.03.2021
Abstract. The paper aims to prove that during a trial, a defence attorney and a prosecutor use the same communicative techniques to influence the jurors. The author differentiates the notions "communicative behaviour" and "verbal behaviour". Scientific originality of the study lies in the fact that the researcher for the first time analyses the suggestive tactics used by English-speaking defence attorneys and prosecutors to exert indirect verbal influence on the jurors. English-language feature films served as the research material. As a result, it is proved that during direct examination and cross-examination, defence attorneys and prosecutors use verbal manipulation techniques aiming to discredit the opponent and his trial strategy in the jurors’ eyes.
Key words and phrases: судебный дискурс, непрямое коммуникативное воздействие, речь адвоката, речь прокурора, суггестивная функция, juridical discourse, indirect communicative influence, defence attorney’s speech, prosecutor’s speech, suggestive function
Open the whole article in PDF format. Free PDF-files viewer can be downloaded .
References:
Vinokur T. G. Govoryashchii i slushayushchii: varianty rechevogo povedeniya. M.: KomKniga, 2005. 176 s.
Gorelov I. N., Sedov K. F. Osnovy psikholingvistiki. M.: Labirint, 2010. 304 s.
Dubrovskaya T. V. Sudebnyi diskurs: rechevoe povedenie sud'i: avtoref. diss. … d. filol. n. Saratov, 2010. 40 s.
Zaitseva M. A. Sudebnyi diskurs: rechevye strategii i taktiki, yazykovye sredstva vyrazheniya konflikta // Pershii nezalezhnii naukovii vіsnik. 2016. № 6 (6). Ch. 1. S. 74-78.
Ilyukhin N. I. Osobennosti kommunikativnogo vozdeistviya advokata i prokurora na zhyuri prisyazhnykh vo vremya sudebnogo zasedaniya (na materiale angliiskikh kinofil'mov) // Filologicheskie nauki. Voprosy teorii i praktiki. 2020. T. 13. Vyp. 9. S. 256-261.
Karasik V. I. Yazykovye klyuchi. M.: Gnozis, 2009. 406 s.
Kostygova A. S. Lingvopragmaticheskie i stilisticheskie osobennosti vyskazyvanii s sarkasticheskim smyslom // Izvestiya Rossiiskogo gosudarstvennogo pedagogicheskogo universiteta im. A. I. Gertsena. 2013. № 160. C. 101-107.
Kubits G. V. Strategiya rechevogo vozdeistviya advokata v sudebnom protsesse // Vestnik Chelyabinskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Filologiya. Iskusstvovedenie. 2011. № 33 (248). Vyp. 60. S. 80-82.
Safronova T. S. Mekhanizmy suggestivnogo vozdeistviya vo vstupitel'noi rechi advokata (na materiale angliiskogo yazyka) // Filologicheskie nauki. Voprosy teorii i praktiki. 2017. № 6 (72). Ch. 2. S. 149-153.
Smirnov A. V. Reformy ugolovnoi yustitsii kontsa XX veka i diskursivnaya sostyazatel'nost' // Zhurnal rossiiskogo prava. 2001. № 12. S. 145-155.
Sternin I. A. Modeli opisaniya kommunikativnogo povedeniya. Voronezh: Garant, 2000. 27 s.
Tret'yakova B. C. Konflikt glazami lingvista // Yurislingvistika-2: russkii yazyk v ego estestvennom i yuridicheskom bytii. Barnaul: Izd-vo Alt. un-ta, 2000. S. 127-140.
Ustinova K. A. Institutsional'nye priznaki sudebnogo diskursa // Vestnik Chelyabinskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Filologiya. Iskusstvovedenie. 2011. № 33 (248). Vyp. 60. S. 125-127.
A Time to Kill / directed by J. Chumacher. The USA, 1996.
Conley J. M., O’Barr W. M. Rules versus Relationships: The Ethnography of Legal Discourse. Chicago - L.: University of Chicago Press, 1990. 222 p.
Marshall / directed by R. Hudlin. The USA, 2017.
My Cousin Vinny / directed by J. Lynn. The USA, 1992.
Philadelphia / directed by J. Demme. The USA, 1993.
Русский
