On Courtroom Questioning: A Forensic Linguistic Analysis

Catoto, Jerson S.

doi:10.2139/ssrn.4137842

Cited by 4 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 126 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Concerning the employment of the different argumentative strategies in courtrooms much research has been conducted on the use of questions and their answers in courtrooms (e.g. Catoto, 2017;Zydervelt et al, 2017). These studies have come to terms that legal language is characterized by particular pragmatic features that are different from ordinary language, and they also accentuate the fact that pragmatic strategies within courtrooms are used to target a particular purpose of both counsels and litigants.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Argumentation Strategies in Courtroom Discourse

Alkabiri

2024

WJEL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper tries to explore the different argumentation strategies in courtroom discourse. The paper aims to decode the various argumentative strategies that are employed to communicate a successful interaction between the interlocutors in courtrooms. This is done by highlighting the linguistic tools targeting the persuasion of the conversationalists in the legal discourse presented in courts. The paper will focus on five strategies of argumentation, including lexical choices, questioning and answering, oppositional arguments, rhetorical questions, and premeditated arguments. The core concern of the investigation of these argumentation strategies is to show the degree to which they are used by courtroom interlocutors to communicate a successful and persuasive argument to their recipients. Data used in this study are derived from two legal trials: Nelson Mandela’s trial and Bill Clinton’s trial. The research questions of this paper are: first, what is meant by argumentation in courtroom discourse? Second, what are the different argumentation strategies used in courtroom discourse? Third, to what extent are argumentation strategies employed to achieve a persuasive argument between interlocutors in courtrooms? There are three main findings in this paper: First, attorneys and litigants use various argumentation strategies to influence their recipients so as to be able to persuade the court of their arguments. Second, the power of persuasiveness is entirely based on the ability to use various strategies of argumentation. Third, language is a crucial element in the understanding of legal arguments in courtrooms.

show abstract

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Argumentation Strategies in Courtroom Discourse

Alkabiri

2024

WJEL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Much research has been conducted on the use of questions and their answers in courtroom discourse by focusing on the use of the different linguistic strategies in courtrooms in general and the use of questioning with all its tools in particular (e.g., Catoto, 2017;Zydervelt et al, 2017). These studies have come to terms that legal language is characterized by particular linguistic features that are different from ordinary language, and they also accentuate the fact that questions within courtrooms are not only used to instigate answers on the part of the addressees, but they also serve to communicate and confirm further pragmatic meanings.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Questioning Strategies in Courtrooms

Aldosari

2023

WJEL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper attempts to explore the different strategies of questioning in courtroom discourse, by highlighting the various discursive structures employed to form a question between courtroom interlocutors. More specifically, this research looks at the techniques employed in courtroom cross-examination to persuade the judge(s) to accept attorneys' accounts of what happened as well as the effectiveness of responses in fending off the influence and power of barristers. The corpus of this study is taken from 3 testimonies of prosecution witnesses in the trial of Timothy McVeigh concerning the Oklahoma City Bombing in 1997. By employing both quantitative and qualitative methods, the study investigates six questioning patterns, including wh-questions, yes-no questions, tag questions, so-questions, say-questions, and declarative questions. The study reveals that some types of questions used in courtrooms are strategically utilized to persuade juries and judges, confirm a piece of information, clarify an argument, threatening witnesses’ face, manipulate and/or coerce interlocutors within courtrooms. The paper also reveals that questioning is not only used to instigate an answer or a response but also to communicate information and draw conclusions.

show abstract

“…Studies relative to courtroom proceedings were accentuated in the parlance of types of questions (Catoto, 2017) and the utilization of different types of modals using the prosecutors' resolutions (Catoto, 2022). However, the current study focused on identifying the different types of illocutionary acts as mentioned in the Transcript of Stenographers' Notes.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Illocutionary Acts in Courtroom Proceedings: The Contexts of Local Courts in the Philippines

Catoto

2023

RCM. Res. J.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Courtroom proceedings gives a lucid picture of the utilization of discourse in the judicial entities. This qualitative study employing content analysis aimed at determining the common illocutionary acts found in the contexts of local courts in the Philippines. The Transcripts of Stenographer’s Note (TSN) served as the corpora of the study. Each of the speech acts presented the different views of how language was used during courtroom questioning. Responses of the witnesses articulated their defense in order to provide the vivid picture on every event. Thus, it provided the step-by-step process of knowing the veracity of cases. Through this, the judge can come up with a fair and just decision. The implications provided how Forensic Linguistics played a crucial role in the analysis of texts.

show abstract

On Courtroom Questioning: A Forensic Linguistic Analysis

Cited by 4 publications

References 126 publications

Argumentation Strategies in Courtroom Discourse

Argumentation Strategies in Courtroom Discourse

Questioning Strategies in Courtrooms

Illocutionary Acts in Courtroom Proceedings: The Contexts of Local Courts in the Philippines

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About