Article

Name: Representation of expert knowledge in institutional discourse practices

Authors: Boginskaya O. A.

Irkutsk National Research Technical University, Irkutsk, Russian Federation

In the section Linguistics

Abstract:

A jury trial involves both legal professionals and laymen without legal training and knowledge. This heterogeneity of participants indicates the asymmetric relationships in the courtroom. Since jurors play a crucial role in the trial, it is extremely important for them not to experience difficulties in understanding and interpreting the discursive practices of lawyers. The paper studies the discursive strategies and linguistic means of expert knowledge representation in the institutional genre of “judicial instructions.” Although regularly used to overcome knowledge asymmetry in the process of communication between professional lawyers and jurors, explanatory strategies in the Russian-language judicial instructions have not previously been the object of linguistic analysis. The hypothesis has been put forward stating that explanatory strategies help to overcome difficulties in understanding and interpreting legal texts by non-professional participants. The analysis of the corpus has shown that Russian judges use the following explanatory strategies to overcome cognitive and communicative problems amid the knowledge asymmetry: 1) definition, i.e., explication of the meaning of a term by indicating its distinctive features; 2) description, i.e., a narrative transfer of expert knowledge by establishing its connection with everyday knowledge; 3) exemplification, i.e., an appeal to the everyday experience by correlating legal categories with specific objects or events of everyday life; 4) metaphorization, i.e., interaction between two objects or phenomena based on their subject, feature, or functional similarities resulting in legal categories approaching the everyday experience; 5) synonymization, i.e., replacement of abstract legal concepts with everyday lexical units that have similar meanings.

Keywords: discourse, legal language, explanatory strategy, legal term, definition, metaphor

Bibliography:

Anesa P. Now you are getting into the law: mediation of specialized language in a jury trial. Fachsprache. 2009, vol. 1–2, pp. 64–82.

Anesa P. The deconstruction and reconstruction of legal information in expert-lay online interaction. ESP Today. 2016, vol. 4 (1), pp. 69–86.

Barabash O. V. Razgranichenie omonimii i polisemii yuridicheskikh terminov [Differentiation of homonymy and polysemy of legal terms]. Vestnik Moskovskogo gosudarstvennogo gumanitarnogo universiteta im. M. A. Sholokhova. Filologicheskie nauki. 2015, vol. 2, pp. 39–51.

Bugliosi V. Outrage: The Five Reasons Why O. J. Simpson Got away with Murder. New York, Island Books, 1996, 500 p.

Calsamiglia H., Dijk T. A. van. Popularization discourse and knowledge about the genome. Discourse and Society. 2004, vol. 15 (4), pp. 369–389.

Camus J. W. Metaphors of cancer in scientific popularization articles in the British press. Discourse Studies. 2009, vol. 11 (4), pp. 465–495.

Ciapuscio G. E. Formulation and reformulation procedures in verbal interactions between experts and (semi-) laypersons. Discourse Studies. 2004, vol. 5 (2), pp. 207–233.

Diamond S. S., Levi J. N. Improving decisions on death by revising and testing jury instructions. Judicature. 1996, vol. 79, pp. 224–232.

Elwork A., Sales B. D., Alfini J. J. Juridic decisions: In ignorance of the law or in light of it? Law and Human Behavior. 1977, vol. 1, pp. 163–189.

Frank J., Applegate B. K. Assessing juror understanding of capital-sentencing in-structions. Crime and Delinquency. 1998, vol. 44, pp. 412–433.

Golev N. D. Pravovaya kommunikatsiya v zerkale estestvennogo yazyka [The legal aspect of language in linguistic coverage]. In: Yurislingvistika-7: Yazyk kak fenomen pravovoy kommunikatsii: Sb. nauch. tr. [Legal Linguistics-7: Language as a pheno menon of legal communication: Coll. of sci. works]. Barnaul, Altai State Univ. Publ., 2006, pp. 8–38.

Golev N. D. Yuridicheskiy aspekt yazyka v lingvisticheskom osveshchenii [The legal aspect of language in linguistic coverage]. In: Yurislingvistika-1: Problemy i perspektivy: Sb. nauch. tr. [Legal Linguistics-1: Problems and prospects: Coll. of sci. works]. Barnaul, Altai State Univ. Publ., 1999, pp. 11–58.

Gotti M. Reformulation and recontextualization in popularization discourse. Ibérica. 2014, vol. 27, pp. 15–34.

Gülich E. Conversational techniques used in transferring knowledge between medi-cal experts and non-experts. Discourse Studies. 2014, vol. 5, pp. 235–263.

Heffer C. The language of jury trial. Houndmills, Palgrave, 2005, 253 p.

Imwinkeiried E. J., Schwed L. R. Guidelines for drafting understandable jury in structions: An introduction to the use of psycholinguistics. Criminal Law Bulletin. 1987, vol. 23, pp. 135–150.

Krapivkina O. A. Diskurs soglasovaniya kak rezul’tat integrirovaniya “vozmozhnykh mirov” kommunikantov (na materiale sudebnykh rechey) [Discourse of concord as a result of integration of “possible worlds” of communicants (based on courtroom speeches)]. Issues of Cognitive Linguistic. 2015, vol. 2 (55), pp. 45–50.