Pragmatic Presupposition Of Public Prosecutor’s Interrogation In Criminal Trial

Pragmatic presupposition is the common information or background hypothesis of both sides of communication.It is subjective,unidirectional and concealed.It is often used by judicial practitioners as a pragmatic strategy to obtain an ideal response.In criminal trial,the public prosecutor unilaterally treats the information that he subjectively considers to be beneficial to the victim as a hidden language form for guiding the defendant to respond accordingly reply to the victim’s direction.Not only does it constructs a dynamic cognitive context for the judges,makes the interrogation theme compact and coherent,incr eases the persuasive power of prosecutors’ comlaints,but also it can generate language traps.we can divide the pragmatic presupposition into real pragmatic presupposition and false pragmatic presupposition.According to the facts or the case and of conviction and sentencing,the real pragmatic presupposition can be divided into motivation presupposition,repentance presupposition,harm presu pposition and identity presupposition.From the subjective attitude of the public prosecutor,the false pragmatic presupposition can be divided into failure false pragmatic presupposition and existential false pragmatic presupposition.In addition,the generative motivation of Pragmatic Presupposition can be summarized as presupposition trigger,cooperative principle,conform to the psychological world of the defendant and so on.From the research,we can provide people some references for future related research,help people correctly understand and evaluate the pragmatic presuposition strategy,and provide the judicial practitioners with methods to improve the language skills to promote the efficiency of court trial.