Abstract

The article deals with investigation of the speech act of refusal in juridical linguistic aspect. A dialogue between the driver and the highway patrolman was used as material for analysis. The highway patrolman registered in the protocol of detention the refusal of the driver to undergo medical check-up for alcohol intoxication. However, later the traffic violator informed police officers that he had not refused to undergo the medical check-up. In the course of linguistic expertise of the dialogue, explicit and implicit forms of the speech act of refusal to undergo medical check-up for alcohol intoxication were revealed. The analysis of implicit forms of expression of refusal in conflictual text is urgent within the framework of juridical linguistic discourse. The implicit content of refusal can be revealed in live communication only, as it is impossible to single it out in the semantics of an isolated expression. The indicators of the communicative intentions of the interlocutors include the strategies and tactics realized by them. As a result of the study of the dialogue between the driver and the highway patrolman, the following tactics actualizing the implicit speech act of refusal have been revealed: interrogative utterances, evasion from answering (evasive answer), refusal-pseudoconcent, assurance, and redirection. The ways of expression of implicit refusal revealed help the speaker to avoid a direct answer, to hide and veil the refusal with the aim of withdrawal from responsibility, and to decline all responsibility for the pronounced, as the listener makes a conclusion about the real communicative intention of the speaker on their own. The results of this study could be useful for students of philology in their acquisition of the disciplines oriented towards the formation of the habits and skills of forensic linguistic expertise.

Full Text
Paper version not known

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