Pragmatic Presupposition Of Court Discourse

Forensic linguistics is a new branch of linguistics and the study on the courtroom discourse actually broadens the subject domain of applied linguistics. To some extent,the study of pragmatic presupposition during the courtroom debate not merely provides a new perspective for linguistics, but enriches the pragmatic research on courtroom discourse.The paper is a comprehensive analysis about the employment of pragmatic presupposition in the courtroom discourse from the perspective of pragmatics. It aims to find out the main implementing forms of pragmatic presupposition and investigate how they make a contribution to the dispute and persuasion during the courtroom debate.Above all, it refers to how a beneficial impact is made for participants and how an unfavorable impact is canceled over a court trial.According to certain authentic court materials, this paper attempts to study and explore courtroom discourse combined with pragmatic presupposition theories dynamically. This research is mainly conducted from qualitative analysis to make a descriptive summary objective in the light of the pragmatic presupposition phenomena applied in court trials. This paper emphasizes the following aspects: description of pragmatic presupposition and comprehensive disclosure regarding its internal structure such as presupposition triggers; analysis of pragmatic presupposition’s features and functions in the courtroom discourse; a focus on how the real pragmatic and sham pragmatic presupposition(an unusual manipulation of presupposition)act over the court debate;discussion regarding participants in the court debate achieving their own purpose through putting various pragmatic presupposition into use.