Language Research

Abstract The function of persuasion as a linguistic action is to change the audience's attitude and behavior or strengthen his beliefs. In general, persuasion is the basic and ultimate goal of all types of communication behaviors. This kind of persuasion is applied in the form of language tricks and the phenomenon of persuasion has an active presence in speech. The study of linguistic methods and tools involved in persuasion leads to the examination of the issue of power and how to dominate the mind, and this itself is the beginning of critical discourse analysis. Critical discourse analysis relies on methodological theories. The theory of LacLau and Mouffe has presented a systematic formulation in this field. Discourse is the result of the communication and interaction of the speakers in a social and cultural context. Legal discourse, due to the inherent nature of communication with the audience through "language", contains various methods of persuasion, which discourse analysis can discover many of them. The Dispute Resolution Council, as a legal-judicial institution, has created a special legal discourse by using various functions of language as the main tool. The main goal of the current research is to analyze the legal discourse of this council and examine the role of linguistic knowledge in its persuasion methods. In this research, the data has been collected by field method and direct observation, from 20 sessions of conciliation branches of the Dispute Resolution Council of Islamabad Gharb city. The data includes a total of 1,273 parts of speech, which formed the linguistic body of the research and were analyzed in a descriptive-analytical way, based on the theory of Laclau and Mouffe. The research question is, what are the findings of linguistics based on the theory of Laclau and Mouffe that can be effective in the process of persuading the parties to the dispute in the discourse of the members of the dispute resolution council? The result of the research shows that in order to convince the parties to the dispute, the linguistic tools of highlighting, the relationship between the signifier and the signified, backgrounding and hegemony, in descending order, have played an effective role in the discourse of the dispute resolution council members. In this discourse, the members of the council have used several effective words as persuasive elements by fixing the semantic system, each of which has specific meanings with specific signifiers

Abstract Based on Foucault's discourse analysis approach, this study examines participants' discourse perceptions of historical-political words and tries to find the answer to the question of how different historical-discourse formulations and their changing nature is expressed in words as a referent of discourse truth (constructed discourse) and reproduced and  recalled by words. In other words, how is the "word" itself a discourse that can be analyzed? This research was conducted in two stages and two questionnaires with 110 and 135 participants. The method of this research is qualitative-quantitative and based on description and analysis. The second questionnaire in 5 groups of questions evaluates the connection of the word with historical periods and discourses, the difference between the discourse of the word in each period, and the individual discourse of the participants. The data were analyzed qualitatively and quantitatively in the form of statistics and graphs. Quantitative analysis of data from 21 items by SPSS software confirmed a significant relationship between "words" and "historical periods and discourses". The results showed that some words, such as historical-political words, are to some extent formed in discourse and are tied to specific historical discourses. And reciprocally,  independently and disregarding any background and verbal context, they can represent and induce that discourse and reconstruct the components related to that discourse in the mind of the addressee. Thus, although the words have their own lexical meaning in the language, according to different contexts, conditions of occurrence, different minds, and finally different discourses, they show different perceptions, influences, and relative meanings and carry different discourses, and the concept  they have in the mind is a historical  one that has been formed in history. This study concludes that words reflect the reorientation of the discourse formulations and articulations of history and they alone can be studied in discourse analysis and ethnology.

Abstract The impact of power in the criminal court discourse and the interrogation process is manifested in many factors such as context-specific conditions and differences in social position between a police investigator and the accused. This study intends to use politeness strategies by Brown and Levinson (1987) to explore and describe the role of politeness in the interrogation process. The aim of this study is to describe the relationship between power and politeness in promoting the interrogation process because politeness is embedded in power relations. Corpus consisted of eleven transcripts of the hearing randomly selected from criminal cases in public justice administration in Bushehr. The results showed that with the observance of politeness (Brown and Levinson's strategies), the interrogation route could not be well advanced, because the defendants refrain from answering questions due to lack of pressure and threat. But with pressure and harshness of the signs of power, the interrogation route can be well advanced.