Designatum Analysis in Forensic Linguistic Expertise: On the Question of Constructing a Methodology
https://doi.org/10.25205/1818-7935-2022-20-3-75-89
Abstract
The authors substantiate the use of the semiotic approach in applied research as adequate to the integrative nature of speech activity and clarify the concept conflictogenicity at the level of three components of a linguistic sign according to G. Frege: name, denotation, and especially designatum, which does not imply the existence of absolutely identical concepts in the minds of different people. Using the example of an expert opinion, the implementation of the semiotic approach in the situation of conflict designatum, as the most difficult element of semantics for language analysis, as well as the symbolic nature of the “controversial” text are demonstrated. The article highlights the differences between the interpretation of the text as “controversial” and “conflictogenic”.
About the Authors
A. V. Burtseva
Peter the Great St. Petersburg Polytechnic University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Alexandra V. Burtseva, Associate Professor at the Institute of Humanities Higher School of Engineering Pedagogics, Psychology and Applied Linguistics
Saint Petersburg
O. V. Kalashnikova
Peter the Great St. Petersburg Polytechnic University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Olga V. Kalashnikova, senior Lecturer at the Institute of Humanities Higher School of Engineering Pedagogics, Psychology and Applied Linguistics
Saint Petersburg
S. N. Trocuk
Peter the Great St. Petersburg Polytechnic University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Svetlana N. Trocuk, Associate Professor at the Institute of Humanities Higher School of Engineering Pedagogics, Psychology and Applied Linguistics
Saint Petersburg
References
1. Antonov, I. Yu. The Concept and Definition of Surveillance as an Operational-Search Measure. Legal Jurist, 2015, no. 3(70), p. 32. (in Russ.)
2. Balyasnikova, О. V. How to Study Key Words’ Meanings of a Conflictogenic Text: a Psycholinguistic Approach. Vestnik NSU. Series: Linguistics and Intercultural Communication, 2015, vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 22–27. (in Russ.)
3. Belous, P. A., Oskolkova, N. V. Conflict Discourse vs Conflict Text. Bulletin of St. Petersburg University. Language and Literature, 2007, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 96–107. (in Russ.)
4. Benveniste, E. General Linguistics. Moscow, Progress, 1974. 448 p. (in Russ.)
5. Bogdanova-Beglaryan, N. V. The Core and Periphery of the Lexical and Grammatical Characteristics of the Russian Word: About the Lot of Peripheral Units. World of the Russian Word, 2020, no. 2, pp. 23–31. DOI: 10.24411/1811-1629-2020-12021(in Russ.)
6. Brinev, K. I. Theoretical linguistics and forensic linguistic expertise. Barnaul, AltGPA, 2009. 252 p. ISBN 978-5-88210-464-0 (in Russ.)
7. Vedenin, A. V. Surveillance as an Operational-Search Measure, Features of Using Its Results: Abstract. dis. ... cand. legal Sciences. Vladimir, 2012. 26 p. (in Russ.)
8. Endicott, T. Law and Language. Jurisprudence and Philisophy of Law. Oxford, 2002, pp. 935–968.
9. Fefelov, A. F. Semantic Patterns of Interpreting the Symbolic Meanings of Color Terms BLACK/ WHITE in Some US Mainstream Media. Vestnik NSU. Series: Linguistics and Intercultural Communication, 2017, vol. 15, no. 4, pp. 52–67.
10. Finegan, E., Lee, B. Corpus Linguistic Approaches to ‘Legal Language’: Adverbial Expression of Attitude and Emphasis in Supreme Court Opinions. The Routledge Handbook of Forensic Linguistics. London, New York: Routledge. 760 p.
11. Galyashina, E. I. Fundamentals of Forensic Speech Science. Moscow, STANSI, 2003, 236 p. (in Russ.)
12. Golev, N. D. Jurislinguistics and Regulation of Language Conflicts (On the Problem of Tolerant Attitude to Language). Law and Linguistics: Proceedings of the International Scientific and Practical Conference. In two parts. Part 2. Simferopol, Yalta, 2003, pp. 120–127. (in Russ.)
13. Golev, N. D. On the Objectivity and Legitimacy of Sources of Linguistic Expertise. Jurislinguistics-3: Problems of Jurislinguistic Expertise. Barnaul, Alt. un-t, 2002, pp. 7–38. (in Russ.)
14. Kochergina, K. S. Theory and Practice of Using Dictionaries as Sources for Linguistic Expertise. Problems of lexicography, 2019, no. 15, pp. 154-173. (in Russ.)
15. Komalova, L. R. Research in Computer and Experimental Linguistics. Social and humanitarian sciences. Domestic and foreign literature, ser. 6. Linguistics, 2022, no. 1, pp. 24–34. DOI: 10.31249/ling/2022.01.02 (in Russ.)
16. Kuskov, G. V. General and Particular Tasks of the Methodology of Forensic Linguistic Expertise. Theory and practice of social development, 2011, no. 5, pp. 217–224. (in Russ.)
17. Lakhin, V. D. Surveillance as an Operative-Search Measure. Bulletin of the Omsk University. Series “Right”, 2007, no. 2(11), рр. 106–111. (in Russ.)
18. Leech, G. Principles of Pragmatics (Longman Linguistics Library; no. 30) London: Longman Group Limited), 1983. 158 p.
19. Matveeva, O. N. To the Question of Conflict Text as a Legal Notion. Jurislinguistics-5: Legal aspects of language and linguistic aspects of law, pp. 89–100. Barnaul, Alt. un-t, 2004. (in Russ.)
20. May, A., Holt, E., Saeed, N. A., Sani, N. A. Socio-Pragmatic Aspect of Legal Questioning: Police Interviews, Prosecutorial Discourse and Trial Discourse. The Routledge Handbook of Forensic Linguistics. London, New York: Routledge, 2020, 760 p.
21. Mikhailova, P. Graphic Markers of Irony and Sarcasm in Written Texts. In: Speech and Computer: 22nd International Conference, SPECOM 2020 (St. Petersburg, Russia, October 7-9, 2020), 346356 р. Cham: Springer, 2020. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-60276-5_34 (in Russ.)
22. Netreba, V.A., Ovchinsky, V. S. The Concept of Operational Experiment. The Theory of OperationalSearch Activity. Moscow, 2009, 86 p. (in Russ.)
23. Sapogova, E. E. Modeling as a Stage in the Development of Sign-Symbolic Activity of Preschoolers. Questions of Psychology, no. 5–6, pp. 26–30. (in Russ.)
24. Sergeev, S. S. Analytics of the Conflict Text. Abstracts of Reports and Speeches at the All-Russian Sociological Congress “Globalization and Social Changes in Modern Russia”. Vol. 15. Social Stratification. Sociology of Conflict. Gender Sociology. Moscow, 2006, pp. 105–107. (in Russ.)
25. Shumilov, A. Yu. Legal Bases of Operational-Search Activities. Moscow, 1999, 128 p. (in Russ.)
26. Stepanov, A. A., Shananin, M. G. Using Results of Operational-Search Activity as Basis for Planning Further Investigative Actions. St. Petersburg: St. Petersburg Law Institute of the General Prosecutor’s Office of the Russian Federation, 2005. 60 р. (in Russ.)
27. Stepanov, Yu. S. In the Three-Dimensional Space of Language: Semiotic Problems of Linguistics, Philosophy, and Art. M.: Nauka, 1985. 335 p. (in Russ.)
28. To, C. Confidentiality in Arbitrations. Legal Discourse across Cultures and Systems. Hong Kong, 2008. 242 p.
29. Ushakova, T. N., Latynov, V. V. Evaluative Aspect of Conflict Speech. Questions of psychology, 1995, no. 5, pp. 33–41. (in Russ.)
Review
For citations:
Burtseva A.V., Kalashnikova O.V., Trocuk S.N. Designatum Analysis in Forensic Linguistic Expertise: On the Question of Constructing a Methodology. NSU Vestnik. Series: Linguistics and Intercultural Communication. 2022;20(3):75-89. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.25205/1818-7935-2022-20-3-75-89
Views:
279
Email this article 