Volume 05 Issue 09-2024
17
CURRENT RESEARCH JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGICAL SCIENCES
(ISSN
–
2767-3758)
VOLUME
05
ISSUE
09
Pages:
17-21
SJIF
I
MPACT
FACTOR
(2022:
6.
041
)
(2023:
7.
491
)
(2024:
8.235
)
OCLC
–
1242423883
Publisher:
Master Journals
ABSTRACT
The expression of language units in a court session serves as a prime example of the manifestation of social standing
and its corresponding speech patterns. Unlike any other speech situation, the court’s reliance on its just principles,
strict rules and re
gulations in conducting discussions, and its commitment to fair justice based on citizens’ equality
before the law and the court, underscore its official status as an arm of state power. The article will highlight the social
factors that influence the speech of the main participants in a court session: the presiding judge, the state prosecutor
and the defense attorney. It will analyze how these factors contribute to the unique language they use in their
speeches.
KEYWORDS
Speech impediment, social factors, court sessi
on, presiding’s (judge) speech, public prosecutor’s (prosecutor) speech,
defense attorney’s speech
.
INTRODUCTION
Understanding the meaning of language units fully
requires studying them in relation to context and
speech situations. The social stratification of a society
speaking a particular language is diverse. Accordingly,
each
group
has
its
own
unique
linguistic
characteristics. For example, regional differentiation,
professional
differentiation,
and
others.
The
differentiation of each social group based on its own
linguistic markers makes studying its social causes
particularly significant [7]. As Abduhamid Nurmonov
pointed out, “professional differentiation” leads to
each group having its own unique linguistic markers,
which we can assess as factors contributing to the
social characterization of speech within an individual’s
Research Article
SOCIAL FACTORS SPECIFYING THE SPEECH OF COURT SESSION
PARTICIPANTS
Submission Date:
Sep 14, 2024,
Accepted Date:
Sep 19, 2024,
Published Date:
Sep 24, 2024
Crossref doi:
https://doi.org/10.37547/philological-crjps-05-09-04
Khurmatillo Ismoilov
Doctorate (DSc) of Andijan State University, Doctor of Philosopy in Philology (PhD), Uzbekistan
Journal
Website:
https://masterjournals.
com/index.php/crjps
Copyright:
Original
content from this work
may be used under the
terms of the creative
commons
attributes
4.0 licence.
Volume 05 Issue 09-2024
18
CURRENT RESEARCH JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGICAL SCIENCES
(ISSN
–
2767-3758)
VOLUME
05
ISSUE
09
Pages:
17-21
SJIF
I
MPACT
FACTOR
(2022:
6.
041
)
(2023:
7.
491
)
(2024:
8.235
)
OCLC
–
1242423883
Publisher:
Master Journals
social status. Particularly, the expression of language
units in a court session serves as a prime example of
the manifestation of social standing and its
corresponding speech patterns. Unlike any other
speech situation, the court’s reliance on its just
principles, strict rules and regulations in conducting
discussions, and its commitment to fair justice based
on citizens’ equality before the law and the court,
underscore its official status as an arm of state power.
It is well-known that oral speech is distinctive in its
constant exposure to a range of factors in various
conditions and situations. A court session is a process
that unfolds as a live (oral) interaction, involving face-
to-face communication among specific participants,
with a defined time and composition. When describing
the sociolinguistic aspects of speech, the physical
proximity of the communicants, or their face-to-face
interaction,
is
considered
crucial.
“When
communication
is
established
face-to-face,
interlocutors express their thoughts and intentions
clearly and easily. This is because they are aided by
certain paralinguistic means such as facial expressions
and gestures, and the imperative, influencing function
of speech is also
perceived” [1]. It’s true that
sociolinguistic investigation of speech is increasingly
intertwined with pragmatic approaches, which focus
on the use of language units in actual speech events
[10]. From members of each social group, certain
aspects of language proficiency are expected within a
specific range of word choice and characteristic speech
patterns. We can observe similar speech patterns
among participants in a court session. For instance, the
choice of specific language units in the speech of the
presiding judge, the state prosecutor, and the defense
attorney during a trial is influenced by several factors,
including:
Table 1
Forms of speech expression specific to social class
specified
/
unspecified
Presiding Judge’s speech
specified
use of strict adherence to literary language norms, formal style of speech,
strength of the commanding act, firm tone, speech aimed at promoting
the law and raising legal awareness, logically reasoned arguments,
expression of the content of laws, observance of all legal language rules.
unspecified
use of emotional-expressive elements of language, exclamatory words;
periphrases, phraseological units, proverbs and sayings, argot and jargon,
occasionalism,
archaisms
and
historicisms,
interjections
and
onomatopoeia, barbarisms and vulgarisms.
State Prosecutor’s speech
Volume 05 Issue 09-2024
19
CURRENT RESEARCH JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGICAL SCIENCES
(ISSN
–
2767-3758)
VOLUME
05
ISSUE
09
Pages:
17-21
SJIF
I
MPACT
FACTOR
(2022:
6.
041
)
(2023:
7.
491
)
(2024:
8.235
)
OCLC
–
1242423883
Publisher:
Master Journals
specified
use of strict adherence to literary language norms, formal style of speech,
observance of all legal language rules, speech devoid of passion, clear,
accurate, fluent, and impactful structure of speech, firm tone, speech
based on facts and current legal norms, demonstrating a high level of
legal culture [4]
.
unspecified
use of speech with a mixture of legal terms, exclamatory words [6];
periphrases, phraseological units, proverbs and sayings, argot and jargon,
occasionalism,
archaisms
and
historicisms,
interjections
and
onomatopoeia, barbarisms and vulgarisms.
Defense Attorney’s speech
specified
strict adherence to literary language norms; speech within formal style;
full compliance of speech with humanitarian principles; acting as a
defender of the defendant's rights and legal interests; speech in harmony
with the psychological portrait of the defendant; defense art, speech
competence; appearing as a person providing legal assistance to
individuals and legal entities; a speech aimed at expressing the interests
and protecting the rights of the defendants
unspecified
use of argot and jargon, occasionalism, archaisms and historicisms,
interjections and onomatopoeia, barbarisms and vulgarisms.
The table shows that the social groups involved in the
court session, while conforming to the requirements of
social status-specific (speech) appearances and
abandoning those that are not, engage in
communication that reveals their social standing and
contributes to the social characterization of their
speech. The words, phrases, and sentences expressed
within this context represent socially-conditioned
speech. It’s noteworthy that this type of speech
necessitates a response from the addressee to the
speaker, which involves choosing linguistic units that
align with the speaker’s speech style and employing
specific linguistic and extralinguistic methods of
communication.
In sociolinguistic research, the speaker’s identity and
the unique characteristics of their speech are so
Volume 05 Issue 09-2024
20
CURRENT RESEARCH JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGICAL SCIENCES
(ISSN
–
2767-3758)
VOLUME
05
ISSUE
09
Pages:
17-21
SJIF
I
MPACT
FACTOR
(2022:
6.
041
)
(2023:
7.
491
)
(2024:
8.235
)
OCLC
–
1242423883
Publisher:
Master Journals
significant that they allow us to recognize, based on a
given sentence or context, the specific boundaries and
social characteristics of the language units used, thus
revealing the social group to which this speech style
belongs. These factors manifest in distinctive ways
during the court process, leaving their mark on the
court session minutes and the text of the judgment.
Particularly: "The application of preventive measure in
the form of imprisonment against Komilov Komil
Komilovichgaovich should be rejected." "Komilov
Komil Komilovich should be sentenced to 3 (three)
years of imprisonment in accordance with Article 241,
Part 1, Article 276, Part 1 of the Criminal Code of the
Republic of Uzbekistan". The use of phrases like “let it
come into legal force,” “let it be executed
immediately,” “let the precautionary measure be
rejected,” and “let the penalty of deprivati
on of liberty
be imposed” in the excerpts from court rulings is
characteristic of the speech of the presiding judge, and
through this aspect, his social status is understood.
Moreover, the inclusion of such expressions in his
speech is linked to the status of the society within the
community [8]. The characteristic features of a legal
speech are that it expresses the content of laws,
logically justifies arguments, expresses opinions in a
firm tone, and adheres to all the rules of legal language
within the framework of a formal style.
“I request that when determining the punishment for
K. Komilov, you take into account his personality,
family circumstances, as well as his full confession of
guilt, the full compensation of the damage inflicted on
the victim K. Komilova, and the absence of any claim
from him. …“I request that the esteemed jury
reconsider the previous court decision.”
The phrase “respected jury” and the expressions “I
request you to impose a sentence” and “I request a
change” in this passage ind
icate that the speech
belongs to the state prosecutor.
This attribution is due to the fact that the speech
focuses on the analysis of a criminal incident. The
prosecutor, by virtue of his role, is responsible for
assessing the committed crime or offense based on
existing law, acting as the defender of state and legal
interests.
Moreover, the prosecutor, who is the representative of
the law and the state, is characterized by the fact that
their speech focuses on proving the guilt of the
defendant with the available material evidence. This
distinguishes it by its content, choice of linguistic units,
seriousness, formality, and lack of emotion. “Because
the prosecutor, from the perspective of their duty,
assesses the committed crime or violation based on
curren
t law” [5]. The prosecutor should be a highly
cultured individual, demonstrated by their accurate
pronunciation, expressive and impactful speech [6].
“Your Honor and members of the jury! …I ask
for K. Komilov to be acquitted and released from the
courtroo
m”. “I request that you issue a verdict of
acquittal for K. Komilov, my client, under Article 277,
part 3 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of
Uzbekistan”. This passage demonstrates that the
phrases “Your Honor and members of the jury!” and “I
ask for K. Komilov to be acquitted and released from
the courtroom,” “I request that you issue a verdict of
acquittal…” are characteristic of a lawyer’s speech,
due to the addressing of the court and the request for
an acquittal.
According to lawyers, one of the most crucial
speeches in a trial is the defense attorney’s closing
argument. This argument represents the pinnacle of
the attorney’s work on the criminal case. It’s a moment
where the attorney defends the individual on trial,
regardless of the crime they are accused of or the law
they may have broken, appealing to humanitarian
principles and striving to ensure a fair outcome [3].
This is a lawyer, authorized to defend the rights and
legal interests of suspects, defendants, and convicts in
Volume 05 Issue 09-2024
21
CURRENT RESEARCH JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGICAL SCIENCES
(ISSN
–
2767-3758)
VOLUME
05
ISSUE
09
Pages:
17-21
SJIF
I
MPACT
FACTOR
(2022:
6.
041
)
(2023:
7.
491
)
(2024:
8.235
)
OCLC
–
1242423883
Publisher:
Master Journals
accordance with the procedures established by law,
and to provide them with the necessary legal
assistance. Lawyers may act as defenders in the case
[2].
In the exercise of their professional activities,
lawyers are obligated to adhere to the requirements of
current legislation, the rules of legal ethics, the
attorney-
client privilege, and the lawyer’s oath. They
must utilize the means and methods provided by law
to protect the rights and legal interests of individuals
and legal entities who seek their legal assistance [11]. A
lawyer’s language (speech) is characterized by a strong
emotional impact and vividness, often employing a
variety of literary devices, such as metaphors, similes,
examples, and more [9]. The content and skill of the
lawyer’s speech during the trial, i
ncluding their
masterful use of language and their profound
understanding of the defendant’s psychological
profile, are of paramount importance. The defense
attorney’s closing arguments for K.Komilov are as
follows: “Respected jury! When we look at these
defendants before us, sincerely remorseful and deeply
troubled, we have faith in their youth and their future
commitment to serving their families, our people, and
our homeland” (From the court transcript).
As the analysis above suggests, there is a need
to study the sociolinguistic characteristics of the
speeches of the presiding judge, the state prosecutor,
the defense attorney, and other participants in the
courtroom from the perspective of the “speaker
-
speech” intersection which requires extensive
research. The speech of these social roles will be the
object of our future investigation, while their socio-
psychological linguistic features will be the subject of
our research.
REFERENCES
1.
Iskandarova Sh. Forms of communication of the
Uzbek speech habit: Filol.fan.nomz. ... diss.
Samarkand: 1993.
2.
Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of
Uzbekistan, Article 49.2 Toshkent: Adolat, 1993.
–
261 p.
3.
Karimov S., Mamatov Kh., Buriev I. The Language
Culture of a Lawyer. - Tashkent: Zarkalam, 2004. -
P. 146.
4.
Mirhamidov M., Hasanov S. The Language culture
of a Lawyer. - Tashkent: Science and Technology,
2005. - 314 p
5.
Moydinov Q. The Lexical System of Legal Speech in
the Uzbek Language: Philol. Sci. Ph.D. … Diss.
- T.,
2019. - P. 43.
6.
Mirhamidov M., Norpolatov N., Hasanov S. Legal
Language and the Speech of a Lawyer. - Tashkent:
University, 2004. - P. 122.
7.
Nurmonov A. The Relationship of Linguistics with
Sociology // Selected Works. Vol. 1. - Tashkent:
Akademnashr, 2012. - P. 136.
8.
Nurmonov A. Selected Works. Three Volumes. Vol.
1. - Tashkent: Akademnashr, 2012. - P. 21.
9.
Saidov A., Sarkisyants G. Legal Language and the
Speech of a Lawyer. - Tashkent: Adolat, 1994. - P. 5.
10.
Yuldasheva X. Sociolinguistic study of Uzbek
historical novels. Filol.fan.b.falsafa doc. ... (PhD)
diss.
–
Toshkent: 2017.
–
Б. 5.
11.
Law of the Republic of Uzbekistan “On Advocacy”
(No. 349-I, December 27, 1996), Article 7.
http://www.lexuz.uz
