A Comparative Study Of Stance Markers Of Plaintiffs And Defendants In Chinese Courtroom Debate Discourse

As a linguistic device to indicate how speakers express their attitudes,opinions,and evaluations,stance markers have been widely studied in academic and journalistic discourse.On the other hand,there is little research on how stance markers are used in courtroom interaction,where they are used to achieve various communicative purposes by plaintiffs and defendants who are the interested parties in the ongoing cases.The current research aims to examine the stance markers used by such interested parties during the courtroom debate stage in Chinese civil court hearings.By drawing on the theorizations of stance markers proposed by Biber et al.(2007)and Hyland(2005)and the features of courtroom discourse,an analytical framework is constructed for the comparative analysis of the stance markers in order to determine the similarities,differences and functions of their use of stance markers in the context of courtroom debate.The data are ten trial videos collected from the Chinese Court Trial Online website,transcribed verbatim by the author,and then tagged according to the classification proposed in the analytical framework,including self-mentions,certainty markers,hedges,affect markers,evidentiality markers,evaluation markers and style stance markers.In respect of data analysis,the frequencies of these stance markers are calculated according to their users in a comparative manner and their functions are analyzed.The quantitative analysis shows the following results: First,all seven stance markers are used by both parties.For every per 1000 words,self-mentions(25.36)are the most frequently used of all.Along the frequency line are certainty markers(24.19),hedges(8.55),affect markers(6.08),evidentiality markers(2.71),evaluation markers(1.03)and style stance markers(0.05).Second,plaintiffs tend to use certainty markers(13.04),and evidentiality markers(1.59),while defendants tend to use hedges(4.37)and affect markers(3.24).Third,stance markers used in courtroom debate have functions like increasing accuracy,achieving politeness,avoiding unnecessary risks,shirking responsibility for proposition,and indicating personal involvement.This work is hoped to enrich the study of stance markers used in courtroom discourse.To some degree,it will be able to expand the scope of forensic linguistics,and contribute to the education and instruction of plaintiffs and defendants in their effective use of legal language in general and stance markers in particular,so as to enable them to master certain defense strategies and improve the effectiveness of defense.