نوع مقاله : علمی- پژوهشی
عنوان مقاله English
نویسندگان English
Paul Herbert Grice’s Cooperative Principle and its attendant maxims provide a relevant framework for analyzing the quality of conversational exchanges within forensic linguistics - a branch of applied linguistics concerned with the analysis of spoken and written language in legal contexts. Effective courtroom discourse is predicated on logical principles that facilitate mutual understanding during adjudication. This descriptive-analytical study investigates the degree of adherence to and flouting of the Gricean maxims of "Quantity," "Quality," "Relation," and "Manner" in conversations between judges and defendants, the two primary interlocutors in Iranian criminal courts. To this end, 34 short and long documentary films on various criminal topics were selected from the IRIB Documentary Channel, recorded, and transcribed. A corpus of 6,180 utterances (2,912 from judges; 3,268 from defendants) was analyzed for compliance with and violation of the four maxims. Using descriptive and inferential statistics, the influence and comparative observance of each maxim between judges and defendants were examined. The results indicated that judges adhered to the Cooperative Principle significantly more than defendants. Their pattern of adherence followed a hierarchical order: Manner, Relation, Quantity, and Quality. Conversely, defendants exhibited a pattern of significantly greater flouting, adhering least to the maxims in the order of Relation, Manner, Quality, and Quantity. This disparity may be attributable to the judges’ experience and command of case documents and procedural law, factors which inherently shape discursive power and conversational discipline in the courtroom.
کلیدواژهها English
