Abstract
This paper analyzes the classification resources in the audio recording transcripts of three trials in China. The findings indicate that: 1) courtroom participants with opposite goals tend to use expressions with different and even opposite meanings to classify the same things, incidents and concepts which are related to the dispute focuses, 2) courtroom participants with the same goals tend to have similar or congruent classifications of the same things, incidents and concepts involved in the cases, and 3) a prominent feature of courtroom discourse is overlexicalization, the analysis of which is conducive to our understanding of the stances, views and claims of related courtroom participants.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
