Responding As Realization Of Adaptation In Chinese Courtroom Setting

This thesis is a pragmatic analysis of responding in Chinese courtroom setting. The core of this study is the formulation of an adaptation model and a detailed analysis of responding in Chinese courts within this model, which focuses on both the description of its linguistic features and the exploration of its pragmatic functions. Methodologically speaking, this study is a descriptive and analytical one.The theoretical framework of this study is based on Jef Verschueren's Adaptation Theory (1999). In order to suit the specific analysis of responding in Chinese courts, Verschueren's original model is further specified according to the data collected for this study. Responding in Chinese courtroom setting is defined as a dynamic linguistic choice-making process in which responders choose responses to adapt to the constantly changing contexts with the ultimate purpose of realizing or approaching their goals. We classify the contexts into the legal obligations Chinese courtroom responders shall fulfill, the legal rights they may exercise, and their psychological motivations. Since responders are required to be cooperative with the court and to give true, informative, and relevant answers briefly and definitely to the court, they have to choose spoken language as their communicative channel and cooperative responses in order to adapt to such legal obligations. Since responders have the legal rights to defence and to refuse to answer any irrelevant questions, they always directly deny the damaging presuppositions embodied in the questions, or tell the court that they refuse to answer the irrelevant questions. As to the psychological motivations, we discover the following six prominent strategies from the data: overinformative responses, responses by recasting the preceding initiations, other corrections, responses by employing various linguistic strategies in the same turn, responses by keeping the same version of events across turns, and responses by avoiding silence. Responses of these types are frequently employed by responders in order to adapt to their various psychological motivations, among which the most prominent ones are as follows: to support their statements; to indicate the 'fact' or theevidence that is helpful to them or to their side's case; to demonstrate their high degree of cooperativeness; to avoid the initiators' detrimental versions of events; to oppose the initiators' damaging versions without offending them; to make their evidence consistent and credible; to avoid being considered dishonest and uncooperative. In one word, they employ various linguistic strategies to adapt to their various psychological motivations with the ultimate purpose of realizing or approaching their communicative goal: either defending themselves or presenting the evidence that is helpful to their side's case.The findings achieved in this study have both theoretical and practical implications. At the theoretical level, the adaptation model formulated in this study may shed some light on future studies of responding in other legal settings, such as police interrogations. At the practical level, various strategies analyzed in this study may be directive and helpful to defendants and witnesses as to how to effectively defend themselves.Since the amended Criminal Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China was implemented in 1996, presumption of innocence has become one of the most general principles, and defendants' legal rights have been emphasized. Responding, as a most basic linguistic manifestation of their exercise of rights, should not be ignored.