A Study On Challenge Of Testimony In Courtroom Cross-examination: From The Perspective Of Conversational Implicature

The thesis reports on a conversation analysis between prosecutors /counsel and defendants/witnesses in cross-examination. The aim of this study is to find out how conversational implicature contributes to the challenge of witnesses/defendants' testimony in cross-examination and main conversational implicature-deriving strategies.Based on Levinson's conversational implicature principles as the theoretical framework and Chinese data, three implicature-deriving strategies are found out. They are: enrichment, amplification and negation. The research introduces some linguistic means under each strategy, such as deriving strong expressions to negate the witnesses/defendants' testimony, making the witnesses/defendants' speak out the extra meaning, specifying the special term to reveal more, etc.Importantly, the research shows further how prosecutors/counsel use the implicature they get from witnesses/defendants' testimony to challenge witnesses/defendants' testimony. Four areas where prosecutors/counsel may launch their attack are introduced: objectivity, consistency, qualifications and capacity.This thesis may deepen the understanding of conversational implicature and challenge of witnesses/defendants' testimony in court cross-examination. It is also hoped that lawyers can do a more effective job in cross-examination when they know more about conversational implicature and make proper use of it.