Journal Paper Published

Abstract

In the courtroom, participants engage in a battle of power through rhetoric, where appraisal and cognitive theories serve as discursive weapons. By leveraging attitudinal resources and conceptual metaphors, participants showcase their ideologies, seeking to bolster their position in the power dynamics of the courtroom, striving to sway the balance of judicial power in their favor. By conducting a critical discourse analysis (CDA) of a self-built Chinese court trial corpus, this study proposes the Cognitive-Functional Courtroom Discourse Model, offering a fresh multidimensional theoretical perspective for analyzing courtroom discourse. It is found that the allocation and distribution of attitudinal resources in the courtroom indicates the intricate power dynamics and role assignments among court participants, among which the assessment of the admissibility, legitimacy and reliability of evidence is crucial in the interaction between different court subjects. In addition, the use of courtroom metaphors reveals the intricate nature of cases and the strategic maneuvers employed by discourse participants in the courtroom. Practically, this study offers resource references and strategic guidance for evaluating and analyzing courtroom discourse, which helps enhance the efficiency of courtroom communication and fulfill the judiciary's function.

Keywords

appraisal theory, CDA, cognitive metaphor, cognitive-functional linguistics, courtroom discourse patterns, power dynamics