The force of questioning and pragmatic strategies in courtroom interrogation: A conversation analysis

Anisah Anisah, Diana Fauzia Sari

Abstract


This is a conversation analysis study on courtroom communication. This study aims to investigate how the forces of question (information seeking and confirmation seeking) were achieved and the pragmatic strategies, particularly repetition, and reformulation, used by the prosecutor during a cross-examination of the defendant in an Indonesian murder case; a courtroom trial of a cyanide poisoning case considered weak due to a lack of sufficient evidence against the defendant. The data was obtained from the Kompas TV YouTube Channel and was transcribed using Jefferson’s (2004) technique of transcription. This study employed a descriptive qualitative method to discover the force of questions and pragmatic strategies. The data was analyzed by adapting Gibbons’ (2003) and Archer's (2005) classification of question form and question force. The results demonstrate both information-seeking and confirmation-seeking questions were used by the prosecutor. Gibbons’ (2003) repetition and reformulation strategies were used to further investigate the pragmatic strategies. The finding shows pragmatic strategies, particularly repetition, and reformulation, were also evidenced in the lines of questioning. The patterns of the findings indicate that the prosecutor attempted to portray the defendant’s unreliability and untrustworthiness in court. These findings also implicate that the existence of the strict rules of courtroom communication and power imbalance in court allows the prosecutor to influence the defendant’s response.

Keywords


conversation analysis; courtroom communication; the force of the question; pragmatic strategies

Full Text:

PDF

References


Aina, O. A., & Anowu, A. E. (2023). Some pragmatic points of description of conducive questioning in courtroom interrogation. Journal of Universal Language, 24(2), 1-30. https://doi.org/10.22425/jul.2023.24.2.1

Al-Mamoory, S. M. A., & Al-Ghizzy, M. J. D. (2023). A pragmatic study of turn taking and adjacency pairs in online conversations. International Journal of English Language Studies, 5(2), 84-93. https://doi.org/10.32996/ijels.2023.5.2.8

Archer, D. (2005). Questions and answers in the English courtroom (1640-1740): A sociopragmatic analysis. John Benjamins.

Arifin, B. (1997). Analisa tanya-jawab dalam peristiwa tutur pengadilan [Analysis of questions and answers in speech events in court, Bachelor’s thesis, Universitas Indonesia]. UILib. https://lontar.ui.ac.id/detail?id=78796&lokasi=lokal

Aronsson, K. (2018). Negative interrogatives and adversarial uptake: Building hostility in child custody examinations. Journal of Pragmatics, 136, 39-53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2018.08.008

Atkinson, P., & Drew, P. (1979). Order in court: The organization of verbal interaction in judicial settings. Humanities Press.

Barnes, S. (2020). Right hemisphere damage and other-initiated repair in everyday conversation. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics, 34(10-11), 910-932. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699206.2019.1700309

Berger, P. L., & Luckmann, T. (1966). The social construction of reality. Penguin Books Ltd.

Budiari, I. (2016, October 27). Guilty or not, Jessica to face verdict. The Jakarta Post. http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2016/10/27/guilty-or-not-jessica-to face-verdict.htmll

Chang, Y. (2004). Courtroom questioning as a culturally situated genre of talk. Discourse and Society, 15(6), 705-722.

Chen, J., & Zhang, Y. (2022). A study of hedges in courtroom oral arguments from the perspective of contextual adaptation. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Publications (IJMRAP), 4(8), 95-100.

Chiang, S.-Y., & Mi, H.-F. (2011). Reformulation: A verbal display of interlanguage awareness in instructional interactions. Language Awareness, 20(2), 135-149. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658416.2011.559243

Clarks, H. H. (1996). Using language. Cambridge University Press.

Cotterill, J. (2003). Language and power in court: A linguistic analysis of the O. J. Simpson trials. Palgrave Macmillan.

Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research: Planning, conduction, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (4th ed.). Pearson.

Dörnyei, Z. (2007). Research methods in applied linguistics. Oxford University Press.

Gibbons, J. (2003). Forensic linguistics: An introduction to language in the justice system. Blackwell.

Gnisci, A., & Pace, A. (2016). Italian politicians hauled over the coals: The pragmatic effects of questions on answers in TV interviews and in courtroom examinations. Journal of Pragmatics, 93, 32-46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2015.12.005

Heffer, C. (2005). The language of jury trial: A corpus-aided analysis of legal-lay discourse. Palgrave Macmillan.

Heritage, J. (2010). Questioning in medicine. In S. Ehrlich & A. F. Freed (Eds.), Why do you ask? The function of questions in institutional discourse (pp. 42-68). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195306897.003.0003

Huang, Y. (2007). Pragmatics. Oxford University Press Inc.

Hutauruk, B., S., Murni, S. M., Sinar, T. S., & Saragih, A. (2022). Speech function and presupposition in Indonesia courtroom discourse. Journal of Positive School, 6(4), 6907-6915.

Jahara, Munirah, & Syamsuri, A. S. (2022). Application statement analysis conversation of the murder case at the Makassar district court (Forensic linguistics). Retorika: Jurnal Ilmu Bahasa, 8(2), 110-118. https://doi.org/10.55637/jr.8.2.5435.110-118

Jefferson, G. (2004). Glossary of transcript symbols with an Introduction. In G. H. Lerner (Ed.), Conversation analysis: Studies from the first generation (pp. 13-31). John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.125.02jef

Kaur, T. (2022). Conversation analysis in a US Senate Judiciary hearing: Questioning Brett Kavanaugh. Discourse Studies, 24(4), 423-444. https://doi.org/10.1177/14614456221099175

Leech, G. N. (2016). Principles of pragmatics (Longman linguistics library). Routledge.

Leung, J. H. C., & Durant, A. (Eds.). (2018). Meaning and power in the language of law. Cambridge University Press.

Liddicoat, A. J. (2007). An introduction to conversation analysis. Continuum.

Liebes-Plesner, T. (1984). Rhetoric in the service of justice: The sociolinguistic construction of stereotypes in an Israeli rape trial. Text, 4, 173-92.

Lubis, Y. B. S., Sinar, T. S., & Lubis, M. (2023). Question and respond types in courtroom: A forensic linguistics analysis. LingPoet: Journal of Linguistics and Literary Research, 4(2), 127-138. https://talenta.usu.ac.id/lingpoet/article/view/8769

Maley, Y., & Fahey, R. (1991). Presenting the evidence: Constructions of reality in court. International Journal for the Semiotics of Law, 4(1), 3-17. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01303504

Matoesian, G. (2018). This is not a course in trial practice: Multimodal participation in objections. Journal of Pragmatics, 129, 199-219. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2018.03.022

Najari, S., Salehi, M., & Farahbakhsh, R. (2022). GANBOT: A GAN-based framework for social bot detection. Social Network Analysis and Mining, 12, Article 4. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13278-021-00800-9

Njeri, K. N., Kiliku, P., & Kiai, A. (2018). Controlling courtroom discourse through linguistic manipulation: A case study of criminal trials at the Kibera Law Courts, Nairobi. International Journal of Social and Development Concerns, 2(5), 60-72.

Purnanto, D., Yustanto, H., Nugroho, M. (2013). Bentuk dan fungsi tanya jawab dalam persidangan pidana di pengadilan wilayah Surakarta [Form and function of questions and answers in criminal trials at the Surakarta regional court]. In Markhamah & M. Huda (Eds.), Kesantunan berbahasa dalam berbagai perspektif [Language politeness in various perspectives] (pp. 235-259). Universitas Muhammadiyah Surakarta.

Sidnell, J. (2010). Conversation analysis: An introduction. Wiley.

Skantze, G. (2021). Turn-taking in conversational systems and human-robot interaction: A review. Computer Speech & Language, 67, 101178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csl.2020.101178

Sliedrecht, K. Y., van der Houwen, F., & Schasfoort, M. (2016). Challenging formulations in police interrogations and job interviews: A comparative study. Journal of Pragmatics, 105, 114-129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2015.09.002

Svennevig, J. (2023). Self-reformulation as a preemptive practice in talk addressed to L2 users. Research on language and social interaction, 56(3), 250-268. https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2023.2235967

Szczyrbak, M. (2016). Say and stancetaking in courtroom talk: A corpus-assisted study. Corpora, 11(2), 143-168. https://doi.org/10.3366/cor.2016.0090

Tkačuková, T. (2015). A corpus-assisted study of the discourse marker well as an indicator of judges’ institutional roles in court cases with litigants in person. Corpora, 10(2), 145-170.

Tracy, K., & Reijven, M. H. (2023). Pursuing and resisting argumentative projects in Q&A sequences during a trial. Journal of Pragmatics, 215, 178-188. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2023.08.001

Tsui, A. (1992). A functional description of questions. In M. Coulthard (Ed.), Advanced in spoken discourse analysis (1st Ed.) (pp. 89-110). Routledge.

Wau, S. (2016). Question construction in relation to pragmatic strategies in courtroom cross-examination in Medan [Master’s thesis, Universitas Negeri Medan]. Unimed repository. http://digilib.unimed.ac.id/20619/

Wilson, A. (2018). Adapting English for the specific purpose of tourism: A study of communication strategies in face-to-face encounters in a French tourist office. Open Edition Journals, 73, 53-73. https://doi.org/10.4000/asp.5118

Wong, J., & Waring, H. Z. (2020). Conversation analysis and second language pedagogy: A guide for ESL/EFL teachers (2nd ed.). Routledge.




DOI: https://doi.org/10.24815/siele.v11i2.35587

Article Metrics

Abstract view : 0 times
PDF - 0 times

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Print ISSN: 2355-2794, Online ISSN: 2461-0275

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.


View Journal Stats