.png)
https://doi.org/10.20339/PhS.3-19.031
Lavitski Anton A.,
Candidate of Philology, Associate Professor,
Head of the Germanic Philology Department
Vitebsk State University named after P.M. Masherov
e-mail: anton_lavitski@mail.ru
Evaluation and analysis of a speech act to the presence in its content a fact of abuse is one of the most common applications that linguistic expert studies solve (a subdiscipline of juridical linguistic — interdisciplinary dimension at the junction of language and law interests). Despite serious experience of this kind of special studies, many theoretical problems, as well as methodological issues are not fully resolved for juridical linguistics. In this article, we tried to highlight the qualitative criteria and quantitative indicators to qualify the statement in the implementation of an offense relating to an abuse of the personality, using the method of parameters. For the first time this approach in the linguistic expert studies has been proved in its entirety by M.A. Osadchy in Russia. However, as it was shown by the results of our study, the usage of this approach in other countries should be corrected in accordance with national legislation. Thus, in Russian criminal and administrative proceedings offensiveness of a speech act is set based on the criteria of attribution, non-normative and taboo. In Belarusian legal system the last parameter is replaced by parameters of facts. In the juridical discourse of the UK arrangement of an expert completion focuses on the evaluation of offensiveness and contextuality factors. The last one involves the study of the communication manners of the speaker, context, emotional intensity, an institutional component, and others.
Keywords: linguistic expert study, abuse, juridical discourse, parameters, judicial model of abuse.
References
1. Brinev K.I. Teoreticheskaia lingvistika i sudebnaia lingvisticheskaia ekspertiza: monografiia / Pod red. N.D. Goleva. Barnaul: AltGPA, 2009. 252 s.
2. Osadchii M.A. Russkii iazyk na grani prava: funktsionirovanie sovremennogo russkogo iazyka v usloviiakh pravovoi reglamentatsii rechi. Moscow: LIBROKOM, 2016. 256 s.
3. Baranov A.N. Lingvisticheskaia ekspertiza teksta: teoriia i praktika: ucheb. posobie. Moscow: Flinta: Nauka, 2007. 592 s.
4. Newman Ch. Section 5 of the rublic order act 1986: The threshold of extreme protes // Journal of Criminal Law. 2012. No. 6. P. 105–116.
5. Eggert M. Iazyk tela: per. I. Satsevich [Understanding Body Language]. Moscow: Pretekst, 2012. 244 s.
6. Pease A. Iazyk telodvizhenii. Kak chitat' mysli okruzhaiushchikh po zhe-stam / per. s angl. T.O. Novikovoi [Body Language]. Moscow: Izd-vo “E”, 2016. 448 s.
7. Ratinov A.R. Ekspertiza tekstov massovoi informatsii — neobkhodimoe uslovie podlinnogo pravosudiia // Tsena slova / Pod red. prof. M.V. Gorbanevskogo. Moscow: STENSI, 2002. S. 211–221.