On The Pragmatic Presupposition Of Leading Questions In Courtroom Interaction

Because of the fact that leading questions are prohibited in court in accordance with criminal law of China, research on leading questions is almost conducted in Anglo-American countries. There are not many existent theories on pragmatic presupposition in leading questions, and most of studies are conducted from static perspective, i.e., many scholars pay more attention to the linguistic forms, rather than the study of language in concrete contexts, and the much more dynamic aspect of this area is largely unexplored.This thesis intends to explore the internal relationship between pragmatic presupposition and the function of leading questions from a much dynamic perspective by referring to the historical and theoretical background of and previous researches on pragmatic presupposition. After a brief review of previous researches on presupposition in legal context, the present study examines various presupposition triggers in leading questions, then gives a detailed analysis of various pragmatic strategies employed by the questioner, including the use of definite descriptions, factive verbs, attributive clauses, temporal adverbial clauses and questions types in leading questions, and then points out the way to identify presupposition traps; subsequently, the present study offers an American case to further the depth of the study. Based on the analysis, the present study concludes that pragmatic presupposition is always adopted by lawyers for its unidirectivity, subjectivity and implicitness to examine witnesses. In cross examination, it is common for lawyers to employ certain effective strategies to obtain ideal testimony to win the case for their clients. During the process, lawyers, by asking leading questions, subtly embed their subjective and unilateral statements into the leading questions, thus inevitably influence negatively the testimony of witnesses. Under the inducement of leading questions raised by lawyers, the facts are always stated in the light most favorable to the questioner’s client. By analyzing the value of pragmatic presupposition embodied in leading questions, this study is designed to improve the capability of the prosecution and the defense. It is also of positive and practical significance for perfection and improvement of certain rules so as to ensure the carriage of justice.