زبان شناسی قانون

2. Linguistic
Forensic Linguistic
Examples
Applications

3. Forensic Linguistics – Reza Ramezani
Definition
• Wikipedia
– “Forensic linguistics is the name given to a number of sub-disciplines within
applied linguistics, and which relate to the interface between language, the law and
crime. The range of topics is diverse: from the analysis of confessions to the
language rights of ethnic minorities, from the assessment of threat in a ransom
demand, to determining the genuineness of a suicide note.”
• IAFL
– The study of the language of the law, including the language of legal documents
and the language of the courts, the police, and prisons;
• Better public understanding of the interaction between language and the law.
• The alleviation of language-based inequality and disadvantage in the legal system;
• Research into the practice and improvement, of expert testimony and the
presentation of linguistic evidence, as well as legal interpreting and translation;
• The interchange of ideas and information between the legal and linguistic
communities;
3

4. Forensic Linguistics – Reza Ramezani
The Handbook of Linguistics
• Linguistic Topics
– Writing Systems
– Historical Linguistics
– Field Linguistics
– Linguistic Phonetics
– Phonology
– Morphology
– The Lexicon
– Syntax
– Generative Grammar
– Functional Linguistics
– Typology
– An Introduction to Formal Semantics
– Pragmatics: Language and Communication
– Discourse Analysis
– Linguistics and Literature
– First Language Acquisition
– Linguistics and Second Language
Acquisition
– Multilingualism
– Natural Sign Languages
– Sociolinguistics
– Neurolinguistics
– Computational Linguistics
– Applied Linguistics
– Educational Linguistics
– Linguistics and Reading
– Clinical Linguistics
– Forensic Linguistics
– Translation
– Language Planning
4

5. Forensic Linguistics – Reza Ramezani
Linguistic Fields
• Broad Divisions of Linguistic Fields
– Theoretical Linguistics
– Applied Linguistics
– Interdisciplinary Fields
5

6. Forensic Linguistics – Reza Ramezani
Theoretical Linguistics
• Phonology
• Morphology
• Syntax
• Semantics
6

7. Forensic Linguistics – Reza Ramezani
Applied Linguistics
• Language Teaching
– Teaching methods and techniques
– Syllabus design and evaluation
• Translation
– Translation errors
– Idiomatic translation
– Fixed utterance translation
7

8. Forensic Linguistics – Reza Ramezani
Applied Linguistics (Cont‟d)
• Graphology
– The study of the systems of symbols that have been devised to communicate
language in written form
– Orthography
– Stenography
– Cryptography
– Paedography
– Technography
• Forensic Linguistics
– The use of linguistic techniques to investigate crimes in which language data
constitute part of the evidence
– In 1950 Timothy Evans was hanged for a murder, but then granted a posthumous
pardon in 1966.
8

9. Forensic Linguistics – Reza Ramezani
Interdisciplinary fields
• Interdisciplinary fields of the Linguistic
– Anthropological Linguistics
– Biological Linguistics
– Clinical Linguistics
– Computational Linguistics
– Ethnolinguistics
– Geographical Linguistics
– Mathematical Linguistics
– Neurolinguistics
– Psycholinguistics
– Sociolinguistics
– Theolinguistics
9

10. Forensic Linguistics – Reza Ramezani
Forensic Linguistic Area
• Linguistic
– We think of Language teaching / language learning
– But it extended its work to medical communication, advertising, and the
intersection of law and language and etc.
• Law Attentions
– Anthropologists
– Psychologists
– Sociologists
– Political scientists
10

11. Forensic Linguistics – Reza Ramezani
Forensic Linguistic Area (Cont‟d)
• Using linguistics for
– Voice identification (Speaker Profiling)
– Authorship of written documents
– Unclear jury instructions
– The asymmetry of power in courtroom exchanges
– Lawyer–client communication breakdown
– The nature of perjury problems in written legal discourse
– Defamation
– Trademark infringement
– Courtroom interpretation and translation difficulties
– The adequacy of warning labels
– The nature of tape recorded conversation used as evidence
That‟s Applied Linguistics  Forensic Linguistics
11

12. Forensic Linguistics – Reza Ramezani
Example
Derek Bentley
1953 – hanged for his part in the
murder of a policeman.
1998 – Court of Appeal set aside
the conviction in part because of
Malcolm Coulthard’s evidence that
his statement was not “verbatim
record of spoken monologue” as
claimed at the original trial.
Timothy Evans
1950 - hanged for the murder of his
wife and child.
1968 - Jan Svartik analysed Evan’s
witness statement and suggested
the language was inconsistent.
A case for forensic linguistics.
12

13. Forensic Linguistics – Reza Ramezani
Derek Bentley statement
Bentley was hanged 28th January, 1953,
for his part in the murder of a policeman.
On 30th July, 1998 he was pardoned,
partly on the basis of the evidence of
Malcolm Coulthard who demonstrated
linguistic anomalies in his statement.
In the original trial it was claimed by the
prosecution that the statement was
produced by Bentley as a monologue and
in response to a simple request for his
account of events.
[…] The policeman then pushed me
down the stairs and I did not see any
more. I knew we were going to break
into the place, I did not know what we
were going to get - just anything that
was going. I did not have a gun and I did
not know Chris had one until he shot.
I now know that the policeman in
uniform is dead. I should have
mentioned that after the plainclothes
policeman got up the drainpipe and
arrested me, another policeman in
uniform followed and I heard someone
call him 'Mac'. He was with us when the
other policeman was killed.
Example
13

14. Forensic Linguistics – Reza Ramezani
Derek Bentley statement
‘then’ occurs
1 in 500 words in general language,
1 in every 930 words in undisputed
witness statements,
1 in every 78 words in police witness
statements and
1 in 57 words in this statement.
‘I then’ occurs
1 in 16500 words in general language,
1 in 5700 words in undisputed witness
statements,
1 in 100 words in police witness
statements
1 in every 190 words in this statement.
[…] My mother told me that they had
called and I then ran after them. […]
We all talked together and then
Norman Parsley and Frank Fasey left.
Chris Craig and I then caught a bus to
Croyden. […] There was a little iron
gate at the side. Chris then jumped
and over I followed. Chris then climbed
up the drainpipe to the roof and I
followed. Up to then Chris had not said
anything. We both got out on to the
flat roof at the top. Then someone in
the garden on the opposite side…
Example
14

15. Forensic Linguistics – Reza Ramezani
A Brief History
• Rapidly Emerging Field of Linguistics
– The name Forensic Linguistics since 1980
• Since 1990s; it has own academic organization:
– The International Association of Forensic Linguistics (IAFL)
– Journal: Forensic Linguistics
– Growing number of books and articles
• Still in its Infant Stage: „Not a perfect science‟
– Application of the scientific study of language to law and criminal detection
purposes
15

16. Forensic Linguistics – Reza Ramezani
Aims of the IAFL
• Aims of the IAFL include
– Furthering the interests of linguists engaged in research on the development and
practice of forensic linguistics;
– Disseminating knowledge about language analysis, and its forensic applications,
among legal and other relevant professionals around the world;
– Drawing up a code of practice on matters such as giving evidence in court, writing
official reports etc.;
– Collecting a computer corpus of statements, confessions, suicide notes, police
language, etc., which could be used in comparative analysis of disputed texts.
16

17. Forensic Linguistics – Reza Ramezani
1. Trademark Infringement
• Examples
– Avita versus Aveda
– McSleep versus McDonald
– Comset versus Comsat
– Bonamine versus Dramamine
– Listogen versus Listerine
– Latouraine versus Lorraine
– Snarnoff versus Simirnoff
– Citisen versus Citizen
– SEICO versus SEIKO
– Monilex versus Soulinex
– ExBier versus Beck‟s Beer
17

18. Forensic Linguistics – Reza Ramezani
1. Trademark Infringement (Cont‟d)
• So what do forensic linguists do?
– A lawyer may have a law suit involving a trademark dispute.
– One company may feel that another company‟s trade name is too much like its
own.
• The more generic or descriptive the name  the more likely such a name can be
used by other companies
• The more unique or fanciful the name  the more likely such protection will be.
• It’s the names that fall between descriptive and fanciful that find their way to
litigation.: “arbitrary” or “suggestive”
– What‟s arbitrary / suggestive?
18

19. Forensic Linguistics – Reza Ramezani
1. Trademark Infringement (Cont‟d)
• Arbitrary
– Arbitrary trade names are non-fanciful words in common use but, when used with
goods and services, neither suggest nor describe the ingredients, quality or
character of those goods or services.
• The trade names, V-8 (juice), Ivory (soap), and Royal (baking powder)
• Suggestive
– Suggestive trade names are also usually words in common use, non-descriptive of
the product‟s purpose or function, but suggesting some quality not indicated by
the name itself.
• The trade names, Camel (cigarettes), Shell (gasoline), and Arm and Hammer
(baking soda)
19

20. Forensic Linguistics – Reza Ramezani
1. Trademark Infringement (Cont‟d)
• The burden of proof
– Offended party has to show that the other party‟s name
• Looks like
• Sounds like
• and Means
– the same as their own.
• To a linguist
– “Looks like” suggests graphology
– “Sounds like” obviously suggests phonology
– “Means the same” suggests semantics
20

21. Forensic Linguistics – Reza Ramezani
2. Product Liability
• Linguistics and products that has caused injury to a consumer
– Suppose an attorney has a product liability law suit in which a person has suffered
physical harm alleged to have been caused by inadequate package instructions or
warning labels.
• Linguistic role
– A linguist is called upon to analyze the language of the warning label to determine:
• Whether or not the warnings follow the guidelines of the relevant regulatory agency
• Whether or not they are clear, unambiguous, and optimally effective.
• For example
– Drug utilization instructions
21

22. Forensic Linguistics – Reza Ramezani
3. Speaker Identification
• Longer than in most other areas of legal dispute
• Example
– For example, suppose a caller leaves a threatening message on an answering
machine.
• Linguistic usage
– Using only the characteristics of that voice in comparison with tape recordings of
voices of various potential suspects.
• If the tapes are of sufficient quality, spectrographic analysis is possible.
• If not, the linguist may rely on training and skills in phonetics to make the
comparison
22

23. Forensic Linguistics – Reza Ramezani
3. Speaker Identification (Cont‟d)
• Problems with such analysis:
– Spectrographic analysis is not allowed in some courts.
– It usually requires suspects to read the original phone message
• Reading voice is not the same as a talking voice.
– The readers, may try to alter their normal speech patterns.
– Juries tend to be impressed with analysis based on electronic equipment rather
than on an individual linguist‟s phonetic judgment.
• Linguistic
– Using both spectrographic and articulatory phonetic expertise.
23

24. Forensic Linguistics – Reza Ramezani
4. Recording Voices
• Recording Voices
– Using advances in recording equipment
– Since the late 1970s, law enforcement agencies have used tape recorders to capture
criminal activity in progress.
• Suspects are either recorded with court authorized wire taps placed in such a way
that none of the speakers is aware of being taped,
• or by using undercover agents who wear body microphones and engage suspects in
conversation.
– Using Linguistics
• Determine whether or not the agents’ representations of illegality have been made
clearly and unambiguously
• And whether or not the target has clearly suggested or agreed to the illegal act.
– Recordings are often taped in restaurants, bars, automobiles, and under conditions
that do not promote easy hearing for later listeners.
24

25. Forensic Linguistics – Reza Ramezani
Danielle Jones
• Last seen 18th June 2001.
• After her disappearance a series of text
messages were sent from her phone.
• Linguistic analysis showed that the later
messages were sent by her Uncle,
Stuart Campbell.
• Campbell was convicted of Danielle’s
murder 19th December 2002 in part
because of the linguistic evidence.
Jenny Nicholl
• Last seen 30th June 2005.
• After her disappearance a series of
text messages were sent from her
phone.
• Linguistic analysis showed that the
later messages were sent by her
classmate, David Hodgson.
Hodgson was convicted
of Jenny’s murder 19th
February 2008 in part
because of the linguistic
evidence.
5. Authorship of Written Documents
26

26. Forensic Linguistics – Reza Ramezani
• Example: threats exist in written form
• Psychology
– Using expertise of psychologists to provide “psychological profile” of the person
who sent the message.
• Linguistics
– To call on linguists to add the dimension of linguistic profiling to their analyses
• Linguistics profiling has two parts:
– Language indicators
• Regional and social dialect
• Age
• Gender
• Education
• Occupation
26
5. Authorship of Written Documents (Cont‟d)

27. Forensic Linguistics – Reza Ramezani
5. Authorship of Written Documents (Cont‟d)
• Linguistics profiling has two parts:
– Language indicators
– Stylistic analysis
• Comparing the document’s style with those of other documents written by possible
suspects.
• Stylistic analysis centers on a writer’s habitual language features over which the
writer has little or no conscious awareness
• Patterns of clause embedding
• Use of parallel structures
• Deletion of “that” in complementizer constructions
• Mechanical errors
• Punctuation
• Discourse features and organization
• And print features such as underlining, bolding, or italicizing.
27

28. Forensic Linguistics – Reza Ramezani
5. Authorship of Written Documents (Cont‟d)
• Point out
– Linguistic profiling has been most effectively used to narrow down a suspect list
rather than to positively identify a suspect.
– This is not to say that such positive identification is impossible
• But, rather, the texts offered for comparison are sometimes dissimilar in genre,
register, and size.
• Example
– One set of threat notes recently analyzed linguistically contained expressions such
as:
• “She will finally the seriousness of the problem recognize,”
• “I will not give warning,”
• “You can be transferred to better position,”
• “If I address it her.”
28

29. Forensic Linguistics – Reza Ramezani
5. Authorship of Written Documents (Cont‟d)
• Analyze
– These and other expressions suggested the influence of Hindi-Urdu English
interference.
– Such a speaker might be expected to place the verb at the end of the English
sentence and omit articles and pronouns.
• Another Example
– Other language expressions, such as
• “I will take the proper course”
• “She was in hospital at the time,”
– Pointed to a person educated under the influence of British English.
29

30. Forensic Linguistics – Reza Ramezani
30