A Study Of Language Game Between The Public Prosecutor And The Offender In American Courtroom Trials From The Perspective Of Game Theory

The language presentation of both the public prosecutor and the offender in the courtroom are quite decisive for the adjudication of the non-civil cases involved. For forcefully holding their own position in the courtroom trials, abundant language strategies are deployed by parties involved in the process of courtroom trials either intentionally or ignorantly. As a core process in courtroom trials, the interaction between the offender and the public prosecutor has seldom attracted the attention of scholars both at home and abroad. By starting from the perspective of Game Theory, this thesis focuses on the dynamic process between the public prosecutor and the offender in courtroom trials.By jointly studying the subjective courtroom trials and objective Game Theory, this thesis analyzes how the Game Theory is applied to the courtroom trials by the studies of three classical American cases, namely O.J. Simpson’s case, United States vs. Susan B. Anthony and the Haymarket Riot. It has been discovered that in these three famous cases, Prisoner’s Dilemma’s Game Model, Rational Pig’s Game Model and Hen’s Challenging Model in Game Theory are vividly embodied in the linguistic interactions between the public prosecutor and the offender.The language strategies adopted by the public prosecutor and the offender are further explored in this thesis, which could be categorized into three types in accordance with different Game Models. For the Prisoner’s Dilemma, the language strategy for both the public prosecutor and the offender is to be orderly arranged from general to more specific expressions, and the offenders should be vague in expression except been scrutiny inquired. Second, in the Rational Pig’s Game Model, the superior party should firstly enhance his credibility and then penetrate into the backbone of crucial issue of the inferior, whereas the inferior should concentrate on flaws and deficiencies and magnify the defects of the superior with the stress of language. Finally, in the Hen’s Challenging Model, the language strategy for the parties is to be initiative and to dig into depth in order to destroy the false presentation and perjury. Sometimes, leading questions should be produced to make the other party confess.