Abstract
This article attempts to construct a mid-level theoretical overview of communication evidence (sometimes referred to as ‘forensic linguistics’), using decision trees as a theoretical framework. It suggests that there are three main issues – the nature of the sample, the type of evidence and the analysis used. The types of evidence are categorised into language crimes, tradenames, meaning transfer and author attribution, and examples and discussion are given for each. They are further subcategorised, and distinguishing features and characteristics are discussed. It is suggested that the type of
 analysis used to provide linguistic evidence needs to take into account simultaneously the method of analysis and the communication systems involved. Communication systems in turn are categorised according to ‘levels’ and variable features. This article is regarded as programmatic rather than conclusive – it is intended to stir debate, rather than be seen as a firm statement.
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 callMore From: International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
