Pragmatic study of interruptive elements in US courtroom discourse
| Authors | |
|---|---|
| Year of publication | 2023 |
| Type | Appeared in Conference without Proceedings |
| MU Faculty or unit | |
| Citation | |
| Description | This project observes interruptive conversational elements and their effects on discourse in courtroom communication based on US Supreme Court argument transcripts. The study introduces the US Supreme Court as a unique environment of the legal system in the USA in terms of legal procedure and both non-verbal and verbal power dynamics and it utilizes both quantitative and qualitative analysis methods to observe this environment in terms of power structures and their potential disruptions. The project devises a new methodology of identifying and classifying interruptive elements derived from two existing methods of interruption measurement in everyday speech and group discourse, namely a syntactic and a context-based method, adjusted to fit the specifics and limitations of Supreme Court transcripts. It also devises a unique categorization to delve into the findings. The study considers the created categories in terms of their relation to certain linguistic concepts (including, for example, Grice’s cooperative principle and conversational maxims), as well as their recurrence within the discourse, and it draws conclusions based on the findings. Furthermore, the study acknowledges the existence of exceptions and anomalous instances within the transcripts and considers both their reoccurrence as well as the connotations of their existence. Altogether the project serves to demonstrate the extent and success of power manipulation with a highly controlled and specific discourse environment and it provides a novel methodology for measuring interruptions within it. |
| Related projects: |