馬拉維大多數(shù)人對法律體系越來越不滿。很多非專業(yè)法律評論員提出,法律制度是一場鬧劇,一個卡特爾集團(tuán),是一系列使國家屈服的、無用的威脅。這是一個殖民化的、具有欺詐性和偏見性的制度,由于其中于國家沒有幫助的人而完全與實(shí)際脫離。所有這些評論其實(shí)都是對司法系統(tǒng)誠意的質(zhì)疑,在司法系統(tǒng)中,每個人都是脆弱和易受傷害的。因此,本研究將聚焦(無)誠意這個話題,通過對采集于馬拉維下級和高級法院的22個刑事審判數(shù)據(jù)的分析,探尋法庭審判是如何運(yùn)行的,公正如何通過協(xié)商、競爭而得以實(shí)現(xiàn)。我們認(rèn)為,分析律師提問時以及控方證人回答問話時無誠意態(tài)度的特征可以從更廣泛的角度闡釋人們對司法制度的不滿。在我們的研究中,無誠意并不等同為撒謊,而是律師通過問話控制的一種模式,是不合作(有意無誠意)的一種形式,也是證人反應(yīng)的一種社會建構(gòu)(無意識無誠意)。首先,我們回顧了三個理論模型,Grice(1975)的合作原則,赫弗(2019)的話語不真實(shí)模型以及廖(2005/2009)的目的原則。我們使用這三個理論模型以及定性研究領(lǐng)域最先進(jìn)軟件之一 NVIVO 11pro進(jìn)行分析。但是,這些模型在某些方面是不足的。這也促使我們開發(fā)一種被稱為可信...

【文章頁數(shù)】：274 頁

【學(xué)位級別】：博士

【文章目錄】：
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
DEDICATION
ABSTRACT
摘要
1.0 INTRODUCTION
    1.1 Background
        1.1.1 An overview of procedure and law of evidence in Malawian criminal trial
        1.1.2 Language, literacy, and the situation in Malawian courts
    1.2 Scope of the study
    1.3 Problem statement
    1.4 Research objectives
    1.5 Research questions
    1.6 Research assumptions
    1.7 Research significance
    1.8 Definition of selected terms
    1.9 Thesis structure and its organization
    1.10 Chapter summary
2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW
    2.1 Introduction
    2.2 Malawi legal system
    2.3 Forensic linguistics
    2.4 Legal language
    2.5 Selected studies in courtroom discourse
        2.5.1 Narrative practices
        2.5.2 Vulnerable and disadvantaged witnesses
        2.5.3 Interpreting for bilingual courtrooms
        2.5.4 Pragmatic studies in courtroom discourse
        2.5.5 Power in courtroom discourse
    2.6 Studies in truthfulness and insincerity
        2.6.1 Truthfulness, lying, and trust in speech
        2.6.2 Insincerity in speech
        2.6.3 Insincerity as language crime (Perjury)
    2.7 Rules of procedure in court
    2.8 What determines questions and what determines answers?
    2.9 Lawyers' discourse strategies
    2.10 Witnesses' answering strategies
    2.11 Limitations in the previous studies as a point of departure
    2.12 Chapter summary
3.0 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
    3.1 Introduction
    3.2 Cooperative Principle
    3.3 Discursive Untruthfulness model
    3.4 The Goal-Driven Principle
    3.5 Integration of the theories
    3.6 The Principle of Believability
        3.6.1 Introduction
        3.6.2 The Principle of Believability: The base
        3.6.3 Dimensions of Believability: the three pillars
        3.6.4 The Principle of Believability and Insincerity as a System
        3.6.5 Principle of believability and its maxims
        3.6.6 Principle of Believability on points of continuum
        3.6.7 Tenets of the Principle of Believability
        3.6.8 Model for measuring witness believability
        3.6.9 The inter-link of the four models
        3.6.10 Chapter summary and conclusion
4.0 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY AND THE DATA
    4.1 Introduction
    4.2 Research Design
    4.3 Study Sites and Population
    4.4 Sampling Procedure
    4.5 Ethical Considerations and Research Approvals
    4.6 Data collection in subordinate courts and instrumentation
    4.7 Data and procedure followed in High Court
    4.8 The Data
        4.8.1 Data from High Court
        4.8.2 Data from subordinate courts
        4.8.3 Data from prosecution and defense counsel
        4.8.4 Data from witnesses
        4.8.5 Summary
    4.9 Data Analysis
        4.9.1 Identifying lawyers' insincerity questioning strategies
        4.9.2 Analyzing insincerity in witnesses responses
    4.10 Challenges faced during data collection
    4.11 Chapter summary
5.0 INSINCERITY IN LAWYERS' QUESTIONING STRATEGIES
    5.1 Introduction
    5.2 Data Analysis
        5.2.1 Question types and their forms
        5.2.2 Insincerity and syntactic classifications of questions
        5.2.3 Quantification of questions in the data
        5.2.4 Insincerity and distribution of questions
    5.3 Discussion of insincerity in lawyers questions
        5.3.1 Insincerity in prosecution questions
        5.3.2 Insincerity in defense counsel's questions
        5.3.3 Insincerity in defense questions: Beyond above classification
        5.3.4 Dominance of questions, their macro-functions, and insincerity
        5.3.5 Insincerity in lawyers' questions and the Goal-Driven Principle
        5.3.6 The law as source of insincerity in lawyers' questions
        5.3.7 Chapter conclusion and summary
6.0 INTENTIONAL INSINCERITY IN WITNESSES
    6.1 Introduction
    6.2 Discourse of professional witnesses
        6.2.1 Unguided narratives
        6.2.2 Formulaic expressions
        6.2.3 Technical terms
        6.2.4 Crafty responses
    6.3 Discourse of lay and vulnerable witnesses
        6.3.1 Inability to know what to say and what to hold
        6.3.2 Highly guided narrative
        6.3.3 Overt and plain responses
        6.3.4 Summary
    6.4 Insincerity as our subject of study
    6.5 Intentional insincerity in witnesses' responses
        6.5.1 Intentional insincerity
        6.5.2 The analysis
        6.5.3 Intentional insincerity in professional witnesses
        6.5.4 Intentional insincerity in lay witnesses
        6.5.5 Intentional insincerity as a continuum
        6.5.6 Cooperation and intentional insincerity in court
        6.5.7 Intentional insincerity and the Principle of Believability
        6.5.8 Chapter summary and conclusion
7.0 UNINTENTIONAL INSINCERITY IN WITNESSES
    7.1 Introduction
    7.2 Unintentional insincerity
    7.3 Identifying witnesses unintentional strategies
    7.4 Unintentional insincerity in professional witnesses
        7.4.1 Failure to respond to in-depth questions on their expertise
        7.4.2 Failure to point the evidence to the accused person
    7.5 Causes of professional witnesses' perceived insincerity
        7.5.1 Poor investigation skills
        7.5.2 Lack of forensic toolkits
    7.6 Unintentional insincerity in lay witnesses' responses
    7.7 Instances of perceived insincerity in lay witnesses
        7.7.1 Failure to provide crucial details in relation to time and dates
        7.7.2 Failure to provide direct responses to questions
    7.8 Causes for perceived insincerity in lay witnesses
        7.8.1 Access to law
        7.8.2 Poor interpreting skills
        7.8.3 Prosecution's failure to prepare witnesses
        7.8.4 Vague questions from cross-examiners
    7.9 Unintentional insincerity and the Principle of Believability
    7.10 Chapter summary
8.0 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
    8.1 Introduction
    8.2 Summary of major findings
        8.2.1 Limitation of previous studies
        8.2.2 Theoretical treatment of insincerity
        8.2.3 Insincerity in lawyers' questioning strategies
        8.2.4 Intentional insincerity in witnesses
        8.2.5 Unintentional insincerity in witnesses
        8.2.6 Practical implications
        8.2.7 Suggestions for future directions
        8.2.8 Recommendations
    8.3 Conclusion
REFERENCES
APPENDICES
    Appendix 1: Peoples' comments about the legal system in Malawi
    Appendix 2: Research approvals
    Appendix 3: Transcription symbols used
    Appendix 4: Sample of data transcript



本文編號：4038082