The Study On The Language Of Interrogation

The thesis is composed of three parts: introduction,theory and conclusion,and the content of theory is composed of five sub-parts.The introduction part puts forward the questions,and introduces the research status,research methods,innovation points and significance of this topic.Domestic scholars have studied interrogation language mainly from two perspectives: investigation science and linguistics.The investigation of the investigation language includes two aspects: one is the investigation language as the investigation strategy,the investigation language is the embodiment and carrier of the investigation strategy,that is,the use of the investigation language to express the investigation strategy,to achieve the purpose of the investigation.The second is the legitimacy of interrogative language.Mainly based on the premise of the purpose of legitimacy,how to ensure the legitimacy of the use of interrogation language,that is,interrogation language is a method or means to obtain the confession of a criminal suspect,is a tool used by both sides of the interrogation to communicate and communicate.From the perspective of interrogation strategies,"threat,seduction and deception" are not independent types of interrogation strategies,but attributes of most interrogation strategies.The criminal Procedure law of China prohibits the collection of evidence by means of "threat,inducement and deception",and the identification of the illegality of the language method of "threat,inducement and deception" in the investigation is traditionally completed by analyzing the confession of the criminal suspect.In particular,it is necessary to go through the trial stage of the criminal procedure process,and the investigation and cross-examination of the oral evidence of the criminal suspect can finally determine the illegality of the confession of the criminal suspect.At present,according to the relevant provisions of China’s criminal procedure and evidence exclusion rules,even if the confession is finally determined to be obtained by "threat,inducement and deception",it is only to exclude the corresponding illegal confession,and there is no legislation to clarify the form of responsibility of the investigator.The study of interrogation language from the perspective of linguistics also includes two aspects: first,as a legal language,interrogation language emphasizes that it is a professional language in the process of application,is the embodiment of the investigation power,and has the attribute of justice.In China,there are few researches on interrogation language based on legal language.Some scholars have studied police language from the perspective of rhetoric.Second,interrogation language from the perspective of linguistics includes semantics and pragmatics.Interrogation language itself contains both semantic content in linguistics and pragmatics.The attributes of "threat,seduction and deception" reside in interrogation language,whose meaning is expressed by the language of semantics,and whose function is realized by the language of pragmatics.In order to make the corresponding interrogation strategy have an effect on the criminal suspect,we need to use language to express,speech is the use of language activities,that is,"threat,temptation,deception" in the interrogation is a speech act including language and speech.From this point of view,interrogation is a pragmatic behavior of "narrative with words" and "words and deeds" realized through language.The process of using interrogative language shows that the interrogative language of semantics reflects its strategy,while the interrogative language of pragmatics reflects its legitimacy,and the two are unified in the same speech activity.The first chapter focuses on the basic categories of investigative interrogation language.The first section focuses on the definition of the language of investigation and interrogation.Concept is an important prerequisite to determine the scope and paradigm of research.Based on the Swiss linguist Saussure’s dichotomy between language and speech,the author of this paper studies interrogative language as a tool and a product of speech.In other words,interrogation language includes two basic components: language as speech act and language as speech result.The second section mainly introduces the types of investigation interrogation language.According to the viewpoints of most scholars in the academic circle and based on different classification standards,the author sorts out the types of interrogation language,and also introduces the non-language,dialect and cryptic language.This paper focuses on the unidirectional audio questioning language of investigators and the response language of suspects.The nature of the interrogation language of the investigators determines whether the suspect’s response language is legal or not.The third section mainly introduces the characteristics of investigative interrogation language.The investigation language presents diversified characteristics,which are mainly reflected as antagonism,conflict,strategy and relativity of cooperation.The characteristics of interrogation language show that the criminal suspect will not make voluntary confession in most cases,and it is necessary to use certain strategies to make the criminal suspect change the psychology of confession.In particular,the conflict and antagonistic characteristics of interrogation language can not be completely resolved in the process of investigation and interrogation,and the false confession of the criminal suspect is also reasonable.The fourth section mainly introduces the tactics of investigation and interrogation.The interrogation strategy is deceptive and deceptive,and the purpose of interrogation is hidden.The purpose of interrogation is implemented by interrogation strategy and interrogation language.Interrogation strategy plays an important role in the application of interrogation language.The application of interrogation language revolves around interrogation strategy and interrogation purpose.The second chapter mainly analyzes the application of common pragmatic theories in interrogation language,and makes a brief comment on the limitations of different pragmatic theories based on the different functions of different theories in the application of interrogation language.Relevance theory,adaptation theory,communicative action theory and other typical pragmatic theories have played a good role in promoting the application of interrogation language.Due to the different backgrounds of different theories,different realistic problems and research perspectives,a specific theory can only promote the rational use of interrogation language from a certain aspect.The third chapter focuses on the investigation of the application of interrogation language in foreign countries,aiming to provide theoretical and empirical reference for the application of interrogation language in China through comparison.In this paper,the author summarizes the typical representatives of the Common law system,the United Kingdom and the United States,and the typical representatives of the civil law system,Germany,Japan,France and Russia,respectively,from the vertical Angle,and makes a brief comparison from the horizontal Angle.Compared with the civil law countries,the common law countries have a negative attitude towards the interrogation.The common law countries have established a relatively perfect system of investigation and interrogation.Centering on the "arbitrary rule of confession" and the "right to silence system",they have established the applicable limits of the methods of "threat,inducement and deception" in the investigation and interrogation,and established the corresponding exclusionary rule of illegal evidence.Civil law countries have made different degrees of reference to the "voluntary rule of confession" and "right to silence system" of Britain and America.Germany,as a typical representative country of written law in the continental law system,has made clear provisions on various prohibited methods of investigation and interrogation in the Criminal Procedure Law.Following the example of the United States,Japan has elevated the protection of basic human rights of criminal suspects to the height of the constitution.Generally speaking,the two legal systems of the country in the investigation of the interrogation system of legislation and methods to learn from each other,and show a trend of gradual integration.The fourth chapter focuses on revealing the problems existing in the process of using investigative interrogation language.There are all kinds of problems in the process of using investigative interrogation language.This paper mainly studies how to regulate its illegality from the perspective of using investigative interrogation language.Interrogation language,as interrogation strategy and evidence collection method,is unified in the same speech activity process,and is the expression of two different functions of the same speech act: strategy focuses on skill and flexibility,emphasizing the application of linguistics;The method focuses on the validity and validity and emphasizes the application of normative theory.Based on saussure’s speech act theory,this paper points out five problems related to legitimacy in the use of interrogation language.First of all,from the perspective of legal norms,there are legislative ambiguities and judicial differences in the language of investigation and interrogation,which are mainly reflected in the unclear definition of the concepts of "threat,temptation and deception" and the judicial dilemma brought by the conflict in legislation.Secondly,from the Angle of investigation and evidence collection,the definition of "threat,inducement and deception" and the standard of legality judgment are unclear.Thirdly,from the point of view of speech results,how to exclude the confession obtained by the language forensics method beyond the reasonable limit.Finally,in order to ensure the integrity of the research topic,the author also expounds the problems of implicit improper forensics language and procedural illegal language.Chapter five puts forward the path selection suitable for the current situation of China’s judicature in view of the problems existing in the use of interrogation language in China.First of all,with the help of Habermas’ negotiation theory,an ideal conversation situation is constructed for the use of interrogation language,which eliminates the linguistic violence and discourse power of traditional teleology research paradigm,and releases the equal right of speech of the interrogated in the interrogation process.Secondly,from the perspective of due process,the legality of the use of interrogation language is regulated.There are two main functions of due procedure in the process of investigation and interrogation: first,it reflects the theme of restricting power by right in the process of investigation and interrogation;Second,it can effectively guarantee the realization of criminal suspects’ basic human rights.Thirdly,legal rhetoric is used as theoretical support,analytical tool and research method to realize the investigation and interrogation language "from the argumentation rhetoric of remonstrance and persuasion to the thinking connection of facts and norms,and then to the argumentation integration construction of legal methods".The legal rhetoric of interrogation language helps to improve the authenticity of confession and find out the facts of the case;It is helpful to reduce the judicial risk and prevent the occurrence of unjust,false and wrong cases;It is helpful to enhance the legitimacy of interrogation language and enrich the legal meaning of interrogation language.Finally,the author suggests that,from the perspective of behaviorism,the legal regulation of the use of interrogation language should be fundamentally perfected through the legislation of exemplarism.Human behavior can be divided into speech behavior and non-verbal behavior,speech behavior includes speech and language.Therefore,in order to fundamentally establish the legal regulation system in the use of interrogation language,we must start from the Angle of behavior and norms.There are two elements theory,three elements theory and new three elements theory in the theory of legal norms.However,any theory should include the consequences of violating the legal norms,which is exactly what is lacking in the use of interrogation language at present.At present,China’s criminal law stipulates that the criminal Procedure Law only provides procedural legal consequences,but does not provide substantive legal consequences of illegal interrogative language use.Even this kind of negative procedural sanction to interrogation language still has the legislative defect of lack of definition of concept and unclear judgment standard.In view of the present situation of our questioning language use and the characteristics of the judicial system in China,the author thinks that can be divided into three stages,in the legislation Suggestions on the "threat,enticement,deceit and so on investigating the concept of language form,on the basis of general provisions,and then through the example of socialist legislation pattern’s performance in practice to make the language of the questioning,In the process of using interrogation language,the legal regulation should be transformed from procedure to entity,from subjective to objective,and from result to behavior.The conclusion part reviews the whole paper,reiterates and emphasizes the problems existing in the interrogation language,and summarizes the work and function of legal rhetoric in the interrogation language,aiming to reveal the theoretical and practical significance of legal rhetoric in the investigation language research.Finally,the paper points out the opportunities and problems faced by the research Institute of interrogation language.