Psycholinguistic analysis of persuasive effectiveness in court speeches: theoretical foundations and linguistic aspects

O. P.  Lyaska; V. S.  Kshevetskyi

doi:10.32631/v.2024.4.23

O. P. Lyaska Kharkiv National University of Internal Affairs https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6943-8957
V. S. Kshevetskyi Yuri Fedkovich Chernivtsi National University https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9769-4931

DOI: https://doi.org/10.32631/v.2024.4.23

Keywords: language, psycholinguistics, persuasion, rhetorical strategies, cognitive influence, emotional manipulation, trial.

Abstract

The article is devoted to the psycholinguistic analysis of the persuasive effectiveness of court speeches, in particular, the theoretical foundations and linguistic aspects of this process. The key elements of language used in court discourse are considered, with an emphasis on their influence on the thoughts, emotions and decisions of the participants in the process.

Despite the significant number of studies on rhetoric in the legal context, the psycholinguistic impact of language techniques on the cognitive and emotional reactions of participants in court proceedings remains insufficiently studied. The article focuses on the analysis of the effectiveness of various linguistic techniques, such as metaphors, epithets and repetition, as well as their ability to influence the perception of evidence and arguments.

Particular attention is paid to the role of language in shaping legal consciousness and decision-making in court. This study fills a gap in knowledge about how language strategies contribute to effective persuasion and how their study can improve legal practice and the quality of trials.

The article analyses how the psycholinguistic aspects of language are used to manipulate the emotions and cognitive processes of participants in the trial, in particular, judges and jurors. It is noted that the language of court speeches performs not only an informational but also a persuasive function, since it can influence the emotional state of listeners, modify their opinion about evidence and arguments, and form a general perception of the case. Particular emphasis is placed on the study of the effectiveness of such linguistic techniques as emphasis on emotionally charged words, rhetorical questions, the use of metaphors and other stylistic devices that increase the strength of argumentation.

Given these factors, the author proposes an interdisciplinary approach to the study of persuasion in courtroom speech, combining elements of philology, legal psychology and communication sciences. The results of the study may be useful not only for academics but also for legal practitioners, as they provide specific recommendations for improving the effectiveness of courtroom speeches. Therefore, the article contributes to a deeper understanding of the role of language in court proceedings and opens up new opportunities for improving legal practice by optimising language strategies.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

O. P. Lyaska, Kharkiv National University of Internal Affairs

Candidate of Psychological Sciences, Associate Professor,

Educational and Research Institute No. 3,

Department of Psychology, Sociology and Pedagogy (associate professor).

V. S. Kshevetskyi, Yuri Fedkovich Chernivtsi National University

Candidate of Philological Sciences, Associate Professor,

Department of Foreign Languages for Natural Sciences Faculties (associate professor).

References

Tiahnyriadno, Ye. V., & Yavorska, H. Kh. (2009). Rhetorical skills of lawyers: theory and practice. Odesa.

Abramovych, S. D., Moldavan, V. V., Stets, V. A., Stets, I. I., & Kostyuchyk, M. Yu. (1998). Basics of oratory. Economichna dumka.

Koval, A. P. (1992). Business communication. Lybid.

Moldovan, V. V. (2010). Judicial rhetoric: theory and practice. Yurinkom Inter.

Rohozhkyn, O. V. (2008). Rhetoric: general, judicial, operational. Donetsk Law Institute of Lugansk State University of Internal Affairs named after Ye. A. Didorenko.

Bubniak, R. A. (2001). Literary and critical discourse: essence, structure, means of expression [Candidate dissertation, Ternopil Volodymyr Hnatiuk National Pedagogical University].

Yermolenko, A. M. (2016). Discourse in the architectonics of language pragmatics. Philosophical Thought, 4, 69–86.

Kravchenko, A. H. (2015). Discourse in the Light of Scientific Discussions. The concept of discursive analysis by T. Van Dijk. In А. B. Brutman, V. М. Butov, H. V. Vasylenko et al., Actual problems of modern German studies and methods of teaching foreign languages (P. V. Prokhorova, Ed.). Dyke Pole.

Lukianets, V. S., Kravchenko, O. M., & Ozadovska, L. V. (2000). Modern scientific discourse: Updating of methodological culture. VIPOL.

Morozova, O. I. (2010). Discourse as a Cognitive-Communicative Event. Scientific Bulletin of Lesya Ukrainka Volyn National University. Series Philological Sciences. Linguistics, 7, 134–138.

Serazhym, K. S. (2003). Discourse as a sociolinguistic phenomenon of the modern communicative space (methodological, pragmatic-semantic and genre-linguistic aspects: based on the material of the political variety of Ukrainian mass information discourse) [Candidate dissertation, Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv].

Rudneva, I. S (2018). Legal discourse as a model of institutional discourse. The Journal of V. N. Karazin Kharkiv National University. Series: Foreign Philology. Methods of Foreign Language Teaching, 87, 85–91. https://doi.org/10.26565/2227-8877-2018-87-10.

Yulinetska, Yu., & Babii, O. (2022). Overview of methods and approaches to studying English political discourse. Prospects and innovations of science. Series “Psychology. Pedagogy. Medicine”, 2(7), 779–787. https://doi.org/10.52058/2786-4952-2022-2(7)-779-787.