The status of generic structure in expert opinions. Insights from a comparative analysis of American, Russian and Bulgarian documents

• Authors: Goźdź-Roszkowski Stanisław , Mazurkiewicz-Sułkowska Julia
• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

This paper attempts to describe expert opinions from a comparative and genre-based perspective. It addresses the central question of whether expert opinions follow any specific rhetorical and organizational patterns and the extent to which these may have been imposed by the respective judicial institutions in Russia, Bulgaria and the USA. After reviewing the institutional contexts and constraints imposed on experts and their opinions, the analysis focuses on exploring the status of generic structure in three sets of documents: US common law opinions, Russian and Bulgarian civil law opinions. The concept of ‘generic model’ has been approached from the perspective of Genre Analysis using the model of ‘rhetorical moves’ (Swales 1990; Tardy & Swales 2014). The analyses have revealed that expert witnesses can be described in terms of individual text segments, each with distinct rhetorical or communicative purpose(s). While most identified text segments are shared by all the opinions, irrespective of the legal system, the major difference is that the generic structures of Russian and Bulgarian opinions are strictly regulated by law, which results in increased levels of detail and conventionality. In contrast, the discourse community of American experts has much more leeway in shaping the conventions of the genre, as long as the experts take account of the general standards contained in the Federal Rules of Evidence. American opinions reflect not only the expertise of their authors but also their individual style.

Keywords

EN

generic structure; expert opinion; US common law; adversarial system; Russian legal system; Bulgarian legal system

• Publisher: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Warmińsko-Mazurskiego
• Journal: Przegląd Wschodnioeuropejski
• Year: 2022
• Volume: 2
• Pages: 317–331

Dates

published

2022-12-30

Contributors

author

Goźdź-Roszkowski Stanisław

• University of Lodz

author

Mazurkiewicz-Sułkowska Julia

• University of Lodz

References

• ANGELOV, A. (2007), Zhanroviyat model kato komponent ot kachestvenata hrakteristika na vestnika. Sofia. [Ангелов, А. (2007), Жанровият модел като компонент от качествената храктеристика на вестника. София.] Google Scholar
• AVER'YANOVA, T. V./ROSSINSKAYA, YE. R. (1999), Entsiklopediya sudebnoy ekspertizy. Moskva. [Аверьянова, Т. В./Россинская, Е. Р. (1999), Энциклопедия судебной экспертизы. Москва.] Google Scholar
• BHATIA, V. (1993), Analysing genre: Language use in professional settings. London. Google Scholar
• BHATIA, V. (2004), Worlds of Written Discourse. Continuum. London. Google Scholar
• BIBER, D./CONNOR, U./UPTON, T./KANOKSILAPATHAM, B. (2007), Introduction to move analysis. In: Biber, D./ Connor, U./Upton, T. (eds.), Discourse on the Move. Using corpus analysis to describe discourse structure. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, 23-41. Google Scholar
• BOBEV, K. (1979), Formirane na ubezhdenieto na eksperta-kriminalist. Sofia. [Бобев, К. (1979), Формиране на убеждението на експерта-криминалист. София.] Google Scholar
• BOBEV, K. (2013), Izpolzvane na spetsialni znania v nakazatelnoto i grazhdanskoto proizvodtstvo – sastoyanie i problemi. In: Yuridicheski sbornik. XX, 22-31. [Бобев, К. (2013), Използване на специални знания в наказателното и гражданското производтство – състояние и проблеми. В: Юридически сборник. XX, 22-31.] Google Scholar
• BROMBY, M. C. (2002), The Role of and Responsibilities of the Expert Witness within the UK Judicial System, unpublished doctoral dissertation. Google Scholar
• BUTYRIN, A. YU./DANILKIN, I. A. (2018), Vyvody v zaklyucheniyakh eksperta po ugolovnym delam o khishcheniyakh v stroitel'stve. In: Teoriyai praktika sudebnoy ekspertizy. 13 (1), 71-75. [Бутырин, А. Ю./Данилкин, И. А. (2018), Выводы в заключениях эксперта по уголовным делам о хищениях в строительстве. В: Теория и практика судебной экспертизы. 13 (1), 71-75.] Google Scholar
• COULTHARD, M./JOHNSON, A. (2009), An Introduction to Forensic Linguistics. London. Google Scholar
• CZABAŃSKI, J. (2006), Pozycja biegłych sądowych w wybranych krajach europejskich. Instytut Wymiaru Sprawiedliwości. W: https://iws.gov.pl/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/J-Czaba%C5%84ski-Pozycja-bieg%C5%82ych-s%C4%85dowych-w-wybranych-krajach-europejskich-2006.pdf [dostęp: 10.02.2022]. Google Scholar
• GOŹDŹ-ROSZKOWSKI, S./MAZURKIEWICZ-SUŁKOWSKA, J. (forth. in 2022), Opinia biegłego jako gatunek specjalistyczny w sądowej praktyce zawodowej (w systemie prawnym anglosaskim i rosyjskim). W: Academic Journal of Modern Philology. Google Scholar
• GROOM, N./GRIEVE, J. (2019), The evolution of a legal genre. Rhetorical moves in British patent specifications. In: Fanego, T./Rodriguez-Puente, P. (eds.), Corpus-based Research on Variation in English Legal Discourse. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, 1711-1860. Google Scholar
• KASABOVA, I./MIHAYLOVA, G. (2018), Narachnik za veshti litsa. Vratsa. [Kacабова, И./Михайлова, Г. (2018), Наръчник за вещи лица. Враца.] Google Scholar
• KREDENS, K. (2021), Biegły językoznawca w systemie kontradyktoryjnym. W: Iustitia. 4, 217-221. Google Scholar
• KRESTOVNIKOV, O. A. (2018), K voprosu o razvitii yazyka obshchey teorii sudebnoy ekspertizy. In: Teoriya i praktika sudebnoy·ekspertizy. 13(4), 24-27. [Крестовников, О. А. (2018), К вопросу о развитии языка общей теории судебной экспертизы. В: Теория и практика судебной экспертизы. 13(4), 24-27.] Google Scholar
• KUZNETSOV, A. A. (2014), Ponyatiye, vidy i naznacheniye sudebnykh ekspertiz v Rossiyskoy Federatsii. Omsk. [Кузнецов, А. А. (2014), Понятие, виды и назначение судебных экспертиз в Российской Федерации. Омск.] Google Scholar
• LESNYAK, V. V. Sudebnaya ekonomicheskaya ekspertiza. In: https://studfile.net/preview/6335263/ [accessed: 11.03.2022]. [Лесняк, В. В. Судебная экономическая экспертиза. В: https://studfile.net/preview/6335263/ [доступ: 11.03.2022].] Google Scholar
• MCMENAMIN, G. (2002), Forensic Linguistics. Advances in forensic stylistics. London. Google Scholar
• ORLOV, YU. K. (2004), Ispol'zovaniye spetsial'nykh znaniy v ugolovnom sudoproizvodstve. Moskva. [Орлов, Ю. К. (2004), Использование специальных знаний в уголовном судопроизводстве. Москва.] Google Scholar
• PANARINA, D. V. (1), Sovremennyye problemy i tendentsii razvitiya yazyka obshchey teorii sudebnoy ekspertizy. In: https://www.dissercat.com/content/sovremennye-problemy-i-tendentsii-razvitiya-yazyka-obshchei-teorii-sudebnoi-ekspertizy [accessed: 11.03.2022]. [Панарина, Д. В. (1), Современные проблемы и тенденции развития языка общей теории судебной экспертизы. В: https://www.dissercat.com/content/sovremennye-problemy-i-tendentsii-razvitiya-yazyka-obshchei-teorii-sudebnoi-ekspertizy [доступ: 11.03.2022].] Google Scholar
• PANARINA, D. V. (2), Sovremennyye terminologicheskiye problemy metodologii sudebnoy ekspertizy. In: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/sovremennye-terminologicheskie-problemy-metodologii-sudebnoy-ekspertizy [accessed: 11.03.2022]. [Панарина, Д. В. (2), Современные терминологические проблемы методологии судебной экспертизы. В: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/sovremennye-terminologicheskie-problemy-metodologii-sudebnoy-ekspertizy [доступ: 11.03.2022].] Google Scholar
• PANARINA, D. V. (3), Yazyk kriminalistiki i sudebnoy ekspertizy v strukture nauchnogo znaniya. In: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/yazyk-kriminalistiki-i-sudebnoy-ekspertizy-v-strukture-nauchnogo-znaniya [accessed: 11.03.2022]. [Панарина, Д. В. (3), Язык криминалистики и судебной экспертизы в структуре научного знания. В: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/yazyk-kriminalistiki-i-sudebnoy-ekspertizy-v-strukture-nauchnogo-znaniya [доступ: 11.03.2022].] Google Scholar
• RADBIL', T. B./YUMATOV, V. A. (2014), Yazyk sudebnoy ekspertizy: tendentsii formirovaniya i razvitiya. In: Vestnik Nizhegorodskogo universiteta im. N. I. Lobachevskogo. 3 (2), 185-190. [Радбиль, Т. Б./Юматов, В. А. (2014), Язык судебной экспертизы: тенденции формирования и развития. В: Вестник Нижегородского университета им. Н. И. Лобачевского. 3 (2), 185-190.] Google Scholar
• SOLAN, L. (2010), The forensic linguist. The expert linguist meets the adversarial system. In: Coulthard, M./Johnson, A. (eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Forensic Linguistics. London/New York, 395-407. Google Scholar
• SVETLICHNYY, A. A./PANARINA, D. V. K voprosu o teoreticheskikh i prakticheskikh problemakh, vyzvannykh diskussionnost'yu termina «sudebnaya ekspertiza». In: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/k-voprosu-o-teoreticheskih-i-prakticheskih-problemah-vyzvannyh-diskussionnostyu-termina-sudebnaya-ekspertiza/viewer [accessed: 11.03.2022]. [Светличный, А. А./Панарина, Д. В. К вопросу о теоретических и практических проблемах, вызванных дискуссионностью термина «судебная экспертиза». В: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/k-voprosu-o-teoreticheskih-i-prakticheskih-problemah-vyzvannyh-diskussionnostyu-termina-sudebnaya-ekspertiza/viewer [доступ: 11.03.2022].] Google Scholar
• SWALES, J. (1990), Genre Analysis: English for Academic and Research Settings. Cambridge. Google Scholar
• SZCZYRBAK, M. (2022), Interacting with the expert witness: Courtroom epistemics under a discourse analyst’s lens. In: Dieter/Nieto, G. V. (eds.), Language as evidence. Doing forensic linguistics. London. Google Scholar
• TARDY, CH. M./SWALES, J. (2014), Genre analysis. In: Schneider, K. P./Barron, A. (eds.), Pragmatics in discourse. Berlin,165–187. Google Scholar
• TIERSMA, P./SOLAN, L. (2002), The linguist on the witness stand: forensic linguistics in American courts”. In: Language. 78, 221-39. Google Scholar
• TIKHOMIROV, M. YU. (eds.) (2009), Yuridicheskaya entsiklopediya. Moskva. [Тихомиров, М. Ю. (ред.) (2009), Юридическая энциклопедия. Москва.] Google Scholar
• TREUSHNIKOV, M. K. (2005), Sudebnyye dokazatel'stva. Moskva. [Треушников, М. К. (2005), Судебные доказательства. Москва.] Google Scholar
• TSETSKOV, TS. (1998), Sadebni ekspertizi. Sofia. [Цецков, Ц. (1998), Съдебни експертизи. София.] Google Scholar
• TSETSKOV, TS. (1994), Organizatsiya na sadebna ekspertiza v Bulgaria. Sofia. [Цецков, Ц. (1994), Организация на съдебна експертиза в България. София.] Google Scholar
• VLADIMIROVA, S. B. (2021), Sudebnoye ekspertnoye zaklyucheniye kak rechevoy zhanr (na materiale sudebno-meditsinskoy·ekspertizy). In: Zhanry rechi. Speech Genres. 1 (29), 41–48. [Владимирова, С. Б. (2021), Судебное экспертное заключение как речевой жанр (на материале судебно-медицинской экспертизы). В: Жанры речи. Speech Genres. 1 (29), 41–48.] Google Scholar
• WOJTAK, M. (2008), Wzorce gatunkowe wypowiedzi a realizacje tekstowe. W: Ostaszewska, D./Cudak, R. (red.), Polska genologia lingwistyczna. Warszawa, 353−360. Google Scholar
• ZAŚKO-ZIELIŃSKA, M. (2019), Pytania stawiane biegłemu. W: Zaśko-Zielińska, M./Kredens, K. (red.), Lingwistyka kryminalistyczna. Teoria i praktyka. Wrocław, 17-19. Google Scholar
• Laws and cases cited Google Scholar
• Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993). Google Scholar
• Federal Rules of Evidence, Rule 702 (US). Google Scholar

Identifiers

ISSN

2081-1128