Features of language use and forensic linguistics

N.Vijayan

Abstract

Using language function as the basis of research, Forensic linguistics helps in soving the problems related to crime and punishment for the police and judicial departments. In the legal processes, the important language evidences are to be analysed from the point of view of linguistic principles and research methods to help the Law courts in solving criminal problems. For this purpose, the present paper has brought in evidences giving eight crimes that occurred in Tamil Nadu. The data were collected from the author’s Ph.D. thesis. The article follows the structural and comparative method to analyse the materials. It has also brought out the six language functions proposed by Jacobson, namely, Referential function, Poetic function, Emotive function, Conative function, Phatic function and Metalinguistic function and uses the principles of them in analysing the confessions, statements, etc. and helps in identifying the culprits. Furthermore, the article helps in analysing the language use, which in turn will help the students of language and literature, education, etc., to analyse texts given to them.

References

Baldwin J.R. and P. French. (1990). Forensic Phonetics. London: Pinter Publishers.

Barbara, Johnstone. (2005). Discourse Analysis for Rhetorical Studies. Department of English. Pittsburgh: Carnegie Mellon University.

Batuk Lal. (2004). Law of Evidence. New Delhi: Orient Publishing Company.

Coulthard, Malcolm and Johnson, A. (2010).The Routledge Handbook of Forensic Linguistics. New York: Routledge.

Danet, B. 1980. ‘Language in the Legal Process’. Law and Society Review, 14, 3, pp. 445-564.

Gibbons, John (Ed.). (1994). Language and the law. London: Longman.

Jakobson, R. (1960). Linguistics and Poetics, in T. Sebeok, ed., Style in Language, Cambridge, MA: M.I.T. Press. pp. 350- 377.

Jakobson, R. (1995). On Language. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Leech. G. (1974). Semantics, London: Penguin.

Levi, Judith N. (1994). ‘Language as evidence: The linguist as expert witness’ in North American courts. Forensic Linguistics 1: pp. 1–26.

McMenamin, Gerald R. (2002). Forensic Linguistics: advances in forensic stylistics. Boca Raton: CRC Press.

Rafferty, Lisa. (1999). ‘Anything you say can and will be used against you: Spectrographic Evidence in criminal cases’. American Criminal Law Review 36: pp. 291–311.

Rose, P. (2002). Forensic Speaker Identification. London: Taylor and Francis.

Rutledge, D. (1994). Criminal Interrogation: Law and Tactics Placerville, CA: Copperhouse

Shuy, Roger. W. (1998). The language of confession, interrogation and deception. CA: Sage.

Vijayan, N. 2015. Legal Processes: A Forensic Linguistic Study (Unpublished Ph.D.Thesis), Annamalainagar: Annamalai University.

Vijayan, N. 2016. Evaluation of the Statements and Confessions from the point of view of Forensic Linguistics. languageinindia www.languageinindia.com ISSN 1930-2940. pp. 76-94.

Vijayan, N. (2017) taDaya mozhiyiyalaal sikkum kuRRavaaLikaL. Dinamalar Newspaper. August 22. page one. SintanaikkaLam