Abstract
AbstractLinguistic Deception Detection DD is a well-established part of forensic linguistics and an area that continues to attract attention on the part of researchers, self-styled experts, and the public at large. In this article, the various approaches to DD within the general field of linguistics are examined. The basic method is to treat language as a form of behaviour and to equate marked linguistic behaviour with other marked forms of behaviour. Such a comparison has been identified in other fields such as psychology and kinesics as being associated with stress linked to the attempt to deceive, typically in such contexts as examined here. Representative authentic examples of some of the most common linguistic indicators of deception that have been identified are discussed, dividing them into two general categories which we here introduce: language asrevealerand language asconcealer. We will argue that linguistic analysis for DD should be conducted relative to the subject’s individual linguistic patterns of behaviour, not on absolutes related to broad generalisations about what is supposedly normal or unmarked in the population at large. We will also briefly discuss some structured methods for linguistic analysis for DD and the prospect that technology and artificial intelligence will provide the means to automate and digitalise the linguistic DD process. We maintain that caution is advisable when considering these, as DD will, in all probability, always remain a work in progress, with the need for a flexible human evaluator ready to take into account many different aspects of the individual subject and the case in question.
Highlights
One of the areas of forensic linguistics that perhaps excites most interest on the part of the non-expert is that which is applied to Deception Detection (DD)
We will argue that linguistic analysis for DD should be conducted relative to the subject’s individual linguistic patterns of behaviour, not on absolutes related to broad generalisations about what is supposedly normal or unmarked in the population at large
We look at the various approaches to DD within the general field of linguistics and discuss some of the most common linguistic indicators of deception that have been identified
Summary
One of the areas of forensic linguistics that perhaps excites most interest on the part of the non-expert is that which is applied to Deception Detection (DD). Forensic linguistics is a broad area of language study which comprises a collection of different insights and approaches that have un-. In the last fifty or so years, these instincts, techniques and hunches have become grouped together and studied more systematically Today, they provide an important tool in the hands of such people as law enforcement officers and legal practitioners the world over. Methods drawn from all areas of linguistics, in particular, fields like pragmatics (the study of meaning in context) and psycholinguistics (the relation between the psychological and neurobiological factors that enable the acquisition, use, and understanding of language) allow one, in an objective and scientific manner, to analyse language to see what can be uncovered over and beyond the literal meanings of the words used or the explicit communicative functions performed by the utterances themselves. (§ 6), we will make some comments about structured methods for linguistic DD and the implications that these may have in the future as the field becomes more digitalised and comes to make use of artificial intelligence
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
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
