Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Refine search results

Journals help

  1. 2 Kształcenie Językowe

Authors help

  1. 2 Wiśniowski A.

Years help

  1. 1 2015

  2. 1 2013

Results found: 2

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  court speech
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
1

Wielokodowość komunikacji w postępowaniu sądowoadministracyjnym

100%
Wiśniowski A.
Kształcenie Językowe
|
2015
|
vol. 13 (23)
91 - 101
EN
The article focuses on a description of the basic tools supporting non-verbal communication in court in administrative judicial proceedings. The basic parameters determining the rhythm of interaction between the participants in the process and the court are the courtroom and its architecture (determining the basic conditions of the kinesic code: time and pace) as well as appearance (including official dress). Those non-linguistic categories influence the identification of the participants in the proceedings as members of one communication community within which the legal reality becomes transformed. Statements of the parties, given the professional ethical standards binding on lawyers, should be characterised by moderate gesticulation and voice intensity. If a lawyer violates customary norms regulating forms of speech and self-presentation, this may have disciplinary consequences.
2

Operatory komunikacyjne w przemówieniu sądowym

75%
Wiśniowski A.
Kształcenie Językowe
|
2013
|
vol. 11 (21)
93 - 120
EN
The article is an analysis of communicative operators occurring in court speeches. The model for the present author — owing to its analysis of the indicated exponents of the text in connection with the functions of language — is the classification of communicative operators proposed by Grażyna Habrajska and Aleksy Awdiejew. The article is based on an analysis of twelve recordings of court speeches (eight in criminal and four in civil proceedings) delivered during a rhetorical contest for lawyers organised in 2012, six of which — among them the winning speech in its entirety — are included in an annex. The material thus compiled has been analysed with regard to the occurrence in court speeches of ideational operators, discourse organising operators and interaction operators. The author has concluded that despite obvious differences between civil and criminal proceedings, a typical set of communicative operators for both types of speeches remains basically uniform. The only difference that can be observed concerns the frequency of occurrence, with hierarchisation operators predominating in criminal proceedings speeches and metatextual operators — in civil proceedings speeches. Thus, when compiling the most frequent communicative operators in court proceedings (with regard to dis-course organisation and interaction operators), the author does not specify the type of court proceedings (unimportant feature) in the “table of typical operators” included in the annex, assuming that in the structure of a model court speech the set of communicative operators remains a universal class.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.