forensic linguistics

forensic linguistics

The Intriguing World of Forensic Linguistics: Unveiling the Power of Language in Investigations

1. Introduction to Forensic Linguistics

In Brazil, studies in forensic linguistics are relatively scarce and it can be concluded that there might be a connection between the scarcity of academic studies and the high, or even overestimated, level of comfort with the current law. While in England great advancements are noticed, with professionals and researchers from different parts of the globe, in Brazil studies are usually restricted to laying the theoretical grounds of the interposed model, as well as debates about the configuration of forensic linguistics practice in the country or abroad. This may hinder the present support generated from the knowledge already obtained focusing not on the crime itself, but on the possible guilty criminal’s handling of language previously to and after the criminal fact.

Applied linguistics, as can be found in practical and real-life contexts, is a growing field with several subfields, such as discourse analysis, pragmatics, and semantics, to name a few. Forensic linguistics, although quite specific, serves as a fertile ground for a great number of explanatory and exploratory studies, offering justice a way to verify textual evidence in order to solve an array of crimes. The aim of this paper is to probe a little deeper into this intriguing phenomenon, considering the different types of analysis and the objectives accomplished in which different national and international researchers have been engaged. Also, the paper provides a discussion about forensic linguistics as an area of applied linguistics that may offer previously unthought-of opportunities not only within the investigation of the crime, but also in the educational sphere with a fresh approach to teaching and learning English for specific purposes.

2. Applications in Criminal Investigations

In fictional presentations of police investigations, the study of language cues has added to the suspense as a crucial aid to the detective. The popular genre of detective stories teems with cases where the linguist’s insights regarding spoken or written utterances were indispensable in the unraveling of crimes. In the first known detective story, the Bible story of Susanna, 563–575 BC, language analysis revealed deceitful falsehood. The interesting fact about the linguistic contribution, however, is that in fiction, the role of the forensic linguist has been picturized as being performed not by a specialist in the area, but by characters presenting such disparate talents as being a police officer, psychologist, doctor, or student. Fictional detectives whom everyone knows.

As is evident from the preceding section, forensic linguistics, though generally unfamiliar to most of us today, has a variety of parallel and similar applications in the field conducted by everyday relevancies, personal, occupational, or otherwise. This provides some understanding of the scope of forensic linguistics. A more exotic meaning of the term, however, is bound to persist because of the popular image of “forensic” having been created by mysteries and crime novel writers. Whether the linguist’s actual contribution to the investigation of a crime is as substantial as in folk belief or infrequent is a matter to be considered in this section.

3. Techniques and Methodologies in Forensic Linguistics

Moreover, forensic linguistics does not regard itself as real science based on a localized inquiry. A more general approach (in particular for the description of language activities) would be one in the cause of law with help of proposals which become fixed in test practice (for instance in the codex of legal procedure). What nearly all contributions have in common is a focus on activities at a disciplinary interface. Harcedo (2000: 14) considers forensic linguistics as the interpersonal and inter-institutional activities, that can make it possible to describe the realization as the content of intentions connected with legal practice.

As with other forensic disciplines, techniques and methodologies in forensic linguistics are developed to enhance the discovery of the truth. Forensic linguistics can be classified by different research methods, and at present, most research focuses on numerous issues about what has been said or written, and by examining linguistic capability, as well as the methodology differences illustrated above. Further, forensic linguists attribute different opinions to when and how (massive) research methods are applied. As a consequence, it might be accurately said that only the results of the research findings are a genuine issue of forensic linguistics. With regard to research method, approaches found in this realm are very different from one another. Researchers who approach it differently include themselves as part of the legal team based on how they categorize the profession, and also because of the unique manner in which they work.

4. Ethical Considerations and Limitations in the Field

At present, predictions or advice about legal success for particular legal situations such as the experience of a forensic linguist in delivering greater legal control are not very reliable. Despite the considerable expertise that is claimed by forensic linguists, one might expect that there be considerable differences between the exception and the general outcome of language evidence produced for legal proceedings in that few would seek judicial review unless there was some kind of legal problem. Much of the public hype regarding the empowerment of language evidence and expert witness presentation in implementing the law is speculative. Nonetheless, the need for forensic linguists to evaluate dialectal reliability, reach defensible conclusions about language descriptions, and suggest ways that expert views may be logically and pragmatically supported by data samples is critical. Given questions about the accuracy of language evidence, detailed methodological descriptions are needed in the presentation of analysis. Moreover, the realized language description and interpretation are always influenced by the comparative lack of control by any theory and model of unconscious, non-deliberate dimensions that strengthen the relationship between mind and language in social life.

The very idea that language can sometimes contribute to having the wrong suspect arrested and charged, or helping the guilty offender go free by obscuring the truth and casting doubt on the evidence, is at the same time both intriguing and thought-provoking. Non-criminals in interaction with authorities, such as lawyers and judges, are given considerable definitive, perlocutionary power to declare an individual a non-criminal. In fact, as Berger (1971) has observed, authorities have the unique power to create and define deviance in a positive manner. Applied linguists, then, are theoretical arbiters, not merely students of linguistics seen as being applied to a problematic non-linguistic situation.

5. Future Directions and Innovations in Forensic Linguistics

Arguably, however, these opportunities and challenges should be understood further in a sector of investigative and judicial institutions for which there is (as yet) little more than simple recommendations to follow in the conduct of FL tasks. While practice in other actor roles in the CJS may be mechanistic, there are further questions that need to be asked and understood with respect to the prominence of authorship in investigative and judicial tasks, particularly given recent moves in some countries to allocate greater evidence management and review responsibilities to investigating institutions. This chapter aims to contribute to a growing area of multidisciplinary exploration of the cognitive contributions of these disciplines to the CJS. Work in both the fields of applied linguistics and forensic science has begun to acknowledge and investigate the impact of examiner or expert knowledge on the cognitive aspects of both ‘speaker’ and ‘forensic’ expertise. The conclusions contain a summary of the ethical importance of such findings and their broader implications for the provision of expertise in the CJS.

Sections 3 and 4 have examined a number of practical issues which currently or potentially shape the methods of FL analysts in casework (e.g. defining rights with respect to authorship at source and selection of comparison data), while the opposing positions taken with respect to a number of other practical issues (e.g. authorial verification method choice and trial experience in the FL expert) have been debated. This current chapter already points to the fact that FL practice is shaped by factors related to its unique characteristic. In addition, the unique challenges presented by the forensic feature of FL work mean that certain aspects of FL tasks are undertaken in significantly different ways to non-forensic FL work or to work undertaken by actors from other related professional fields (e.g. investigative interviewing and different ACCs).