英语论文网

CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION

1.1 Research Background
As a regulation among people in the society, law is of distinct social character. The orientation of the development of legal system strongly represents the advancement of society. Being a product of the social development of certain stage in its history, the legal system keeps changing, while its pattern of advancement varies due to respective forms of past societies. Courtroom discourse, as a linguistic presentation of legal practice, reflects the situation that legal system is strongly effected and constructed, by the macro-situation of society, and vice versa. Wu Ying, born at May 20th, 1981, was the former legal representative of Bense Holding Group Co., Ltd. As the Defendant in the People against Wu Ying Case (hereafter WY Case), she was accused of fraudulent fund-raising, and arrested on March 16th, 2007. Based on the revered case facts, the Defendant lured the victims by committing high rates of benefit, raising over 14 million RMB from several victims. Burdened with millions of liability, the Defendant kept illegally raising funds by committing high rates of interest and dividend. Using the unlawful capital, the Defendant registered several companies. To cover up her heavy debt, she made several moves such as acquiring multiple real estates, making investments and donations, launching false sales promotions to create an image of a being an owner of a well-functioned corporation.
........

1.2 Definition of Courtroom Discourses
Courtroom discourse is given different definition by respective researchers, where foreign scholars take a large proportion. According to Atkinson and Drew (1979:8-18), courtroom discourse is a course of linguistic interaction. In comparison to ordinary discourse in daily life, courtroom discourse covers two different sides. Firstly, courtroom discourse is not actual conversation between two persons, or among people. It is so because most of the contents in court were pre-organized statements of courtroom participants, i.e. judge, prosecutor and defendant. Courtroom discourse is a linguistic reproduction of the case-related information, such as fact, course and evidence. This indicates those statements do not generate new information about the case. Any exchange of information that emerges is strictly regulated by procedure. Secondly, during courtroom trial, details such as the person who initiates the question, content of questioning, and in which phase is question allowed should follow Law of Procedure and related interpretation (Atkinson & Drew, 1979:8-18). Maley defines courtroom discourse as “a linguistic progress of spoken language (see Gibbons, 1994:35)”. Confrontation usually embeds in judicial process, especially in courtroom. Discourse generated in courtroom is filled with structural elements, each phase of a trial in court is filled with some obligated structural elements of courtroom discourses. As Conley and O’Barr argued, “the structural element determines that no speaker in court is taken as privileged (Conley & O’Barr, 1998:21).”
.......

CHAPTER TWO LTERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Domestic Researches on This Study
Mood analysis has bee