This article analyses the nature of courtroom discourse in a Zimbabwean context in cases of alleged rape. The research investigated the language used by both court officials and lay persons during legal proceedings and examined the linguistic and socio-cultural factors that motivate the choice of certain lexical and syntactic features. Transcripts of court proceedings held at the Mutare Magistrates’ courts between November 2006 and March 2007 were the primary source of data. A multi-faceted analytic approach including Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA), conversational analysis and text linguistics was employed. It was established that the courtroom discourse of both court officials and lay persons in cases of alleged rape was characterised by differences in linguistic features such as euphemisms, sexually explicit register, technical (legal) jargon and syntactic complexity. The research also established that, while some linguistic features used by courtroom participants serve a purely legal function, others serve important socio-cultural functions. The findings of the study, it was concluded, have practical implications for both law and linguistics. An example is the need for the training of court officials to raise their sensitivity to language use in cases of alleged rape in order to improve the presentation of evidence in such cases.

Projects

Currently no objects available

Currently no objects available