A Study On Courtroom Conflict Talk From The Perspective Of Dramaturgical Theory

Conflict talk as a very common and intricate linguistic phenomenon in social interactions is inevitable. Such particular linguistic phenomena are naturally formed among the participants motivated with their own interests, opinions or goals. Conflict talk study has not received due attention for a long time in linguistics field due to the inaccessibility of the data and other restrictions. Recently, the research on conflict talk at home and abroad is burgeoning, most of which focus on institutional discouse such as doctor-patient discourse and courtroom discourse.As an important sub-discipline of forensic linguistics, the research on courtroom discourse has been attracting more and more attention in recent years. Conflict talks are very pervasive in courtroom events. Courtroom conflict talks can be investigated associated with the theories of social interactions. Previously published literature of conflict talk mostly belongs to the vertical investigation of linguistics, and one theory that has received relatively little attention is Dramaturgical Theory advanced by Goffman. However, the study on courtroom conflict talks from the perspective of Dramaturgical Theory is few.Based on a qualitative analysis, this thesis aims at analyzing courtroom conflict talk mainly centered on sociology theory, that is, Dramaturgical Theory. Goffman's dramaturgical analysis attempts to interpret social interactions in daily life with theatrical elements. In other words, social interaction is analogous to a theatrical performance or drama in which participants act as different roles in the presence of the audience. All the performance should be conformed to others'expectations. Individuals may adjust to their images as the situation changes. This thesis has provided a grand tour of courtroom conflict talk according to what has been examined in the Dramaturgical Theory-oriented literature.From the perspective of Dramaturgical Theory, this thesis expounds the features of courtroom conflict talk in terms of front region, back region, dramatic realization, performance roles and impression management. The study demonstrates that most courtroom conflict talks are characterized by"I-R"mode, different from"I-M-T"mode in conflict talk of daily conversation. Courtroom conflict talk can be divided into procedural conflict talk and substantive conflict talk according to the content of courtroom discourse. And they can also be divided into surface conflict talk and deep conflict talk based on the conflicting markers. From the perspective of impression management, one participant of the trial projects some kind of impression on the other. Resonant impression management implies the interaction is cooperative. Discordant relationship sometimes results in the occurrence of conflict talk which is labeled as discordant impression management-oriented conflict talk. It figures that impression management-oriented conflict talk involves two processes, projection and attribution.In addition to dramaturgical and goal-directed features, compared with naturally occurring conflict talks, courtroom conflict talks have distinct features, including duality, power-manipulation, and non-feedback. To be specific, the feature of duality can be sub-divided into several pairs of concepts with converse meanings at semantic level, namely, positivity and negativity, seriousness and playfulness, and content-based and evaluation-based.This study is the first attempt to examine courtroom conflict talks by combining sociology theory with linguistic analytic approach, displaying how courtroom conflict talk is mainly constructed from the macro-level. It is hoped that this study can supplement and enrich the present findings of conflict talk research to some degree. Given the restriction based on the amount of the data and the inherent flaw of Dramaturgical Theory, when used to inspect the linguistic phenomenon, this study still calls for in-depth research.