Description and Analysis of the Linguistic Components of the Dispute Resolution Council Members in Persuading the Parties to the Dispute: Critical Analysis of the Conciliation Meetings Discourse (Forensic Linguistics Approach)

Rezazadeh, Mitra; Korani, Akram; Moradi, Ali

doi:10.22059/jolr.2024.385054.666902

Description and Analysis of the Linguistic Components of the Dispute Resolution Council Members in Persuading the Parties to the Dispute: Critical Analysis of the Conciliation Meetings Discourse (Forensic Linguistics Approach)

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

Mitra Rezazadeh ¹

Akram Korani ¹

Ali Moradi ²

¹ Department of English Language and Linguistics, Kermanshah Branch, Islamic Azad University, Kermanshah, Iran.

² Department of Sociology, Kermanshah Branch, Islamic Azad University, Kermanshah, Iran.

https://doi.org/10.22059/jolr.2024.385054.666902

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

Keywords

Patterns

persuasion

discourse

analysis

council

Lakla

Subjects

Click subject name to see related articles.

Alexander, Patricia A; Fives, Helenrose; Buehl, Michelle M; Mulhern, Julie, 2002, Teaching as persuasion, Teaching and Teacher Education, Vol

18; Pages 795 to 813.

Bloor,M.,& Bloor,T., 2007, The Practice of Critical Discourse Analysis: an Introduction. London: ImprintRoutledge.

Fowler, Roger & Hodge, Bob & Kress, Gunther & Trew, Tony.,1979, Language and Control. London: Routledge.

Laclau, E. & Mouffe, CH.,1985,. Hegemony and socialist strategy: Towards a radical democratic politics. London: Verso.

Lesser, Laurie., 2011, Persuading Your Audience, USA: Brandeis University.

Aghagolzadeh, F., 2005, Critical Discourse Analysis. Tehran: Ehmi va Farhangi (Scientific and Cultural). [in persian]

Aghagolzadeh, F & qiyacian, M., 2006, "Dominant Approaches in Critical Discourse Analysis". Journal of Language and Linguistics, number 2, serial 5, Pages 39 to 54. [in persian]

Aghagolzadeh, F., 2013, Legal Linguistics: (lawful): A New Approach in Applied Linguistics", Bukhara, number. 63, Pages 192 to 204. [in persian]

Alexander, Patricia A; Fives, Helenrose; Buehl, Michelle M; Mulhern, Julie. 2002, Teaching as persuasion, Teaching and Teacher Education, Vol 18; Pages 795 to 813.

Baghinipour, M., 2003, Persuasion and some of its measures: a discussion in critical analysis. Language Linguistics, 19th year, number 1, Pages 67 to 88. [in persian]

Binger, A.,1997, Persuasive communication, translated by Ali Rostami, Tehran: Center for research, studies and assessment of radio and television programs. [in persian]

Bloo, M. & Bloor, T., 2007, The Practice of Critical Discourse Analysis: An Introduction, London: HodderArnold

Davoudi, G., 2012, "Methods of persuasion". Scientific and promotional journal of social sciences and media, number 75, Pages 57 to 87. [in persian]

Dehghan, M & Karami, A., 2019, "Evidence in the persuasion of the inspector". Scientific Quarterly Journal of Linguistics, 12th year, number 36, Pages 281 to 303. [in persian]

Dehghan, M & Mehrebani, J., 2021, "Representation of the discourse components of lawyers in persuading the judge from the perspective of legal linguistics: a case study of the discourse of criminal cases". Linguistic essays, volume 13, number 2, Pages 539 to 562. [in persian]

Fairclough, N.,1999, Critical analysis of discourse. Translated by Fatimeh Shaiste Piran and others, Thehran: Ministry of Culture and Islamic Guidance.. [in persian]

Fowler, Roger & Hodge, Bob & Kress, Gunther & Trew, Tony.,1979, Language and Control. London: Routledge.

Ghagolzadeh, F., 2005, Critical Discourse Analysis. Tehran: Ehmi va Farhangi (Scientific and Cultural). [in persian].

Ghasemi Asl, Z & Eliasi Mofrad. H., 2020, "Critical Discourse Analysis of Compromise Based on Laclau and Mouffe's Approach, Case Study: okaz Newspaper". Research in teaching Arabic language and literature, number 3, Pages 173 to 192. [in persian]

Haqiqat, S.S., 2008, Political science methodology, Qom: Mofid University. [in persian].

Hoseinizadeh., M.A, 2003, "Discourse Theory and Political Analysis" Political Science Quarterly, number 28, Pages 181 to 210. [in persian].

Jorgensen, M. & Phillips, L.,2016, Theory and Method in Discourse Analysis, translated by Hadi Jalili, 7th edition, Tehran: Ney Publishing. [in persian].

Kasrai, M.S. & Pozesh Shirazi, A.,2008, "The theory of discourse analysis is an effective tool in understanding and explaining political phenomena". Politics Quarterly, Volume 29, number 3, Pages 339 to 360. [in persian] Laclau, E. & Mouffe, CH.,1985, Hegemony and socialist strategy: Towards a radical democratic politics. London: Verso.

Lesser, Laurie., 2011, Persuading Your Audience, USA: Brandeis University.

Moghadami, M.T., 2019, "Theory of discourse analysis of Laclau and Mouffe and its criticism". Social Cultural Knowledge Journal, y 2, number 2, serial 6, Pages 91 to 124. [in persian]

Motawalli., K., 2004, Public thoughts and methods of persuasion, first edition, Behjat Publications[in persian].

Omidvar, A., 2020, "Analysis of the critical discourse of Ahlam Nasr's poems based on the theory of Lac La and Mouffe". Arabic language and literature, Volume 13, number 2, Pages 78 to 103. [in persian]

Roger., S., 2015, an introduction to the political thoughts of Antonio Gramsci; Hegemony, revolution and intellectuals, translated by Mohammad Kazem Shojaei, Tehran: Sabzan. [in persian]

Yarmohammadi., L.,2013, popular and critical discourse analysis, second edition, Tehran: Hermes. [in persian].

Zaeri, A., & Aghagolzadeh, F. & Ameri, H., 2016, "Description and analysis of lawyers' linguistic and meta-linguistic methods for persuasion inIran's public courts: analysis of criminal court discourse (legal linguistics)". Linguistic essays, number 40, Pages 139 to 158. [in persian].