{"title":"故意鼓励或协助他人犯罪:语言犯罪的剖析","authors":"Nicci MacLeod","doi":"10.1007/s11196-023-10031-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Since at least as far back as the infamous Derek Bentley case of the 1950s in which an unarmed 19-year-old was convicted and executed for murder based on his alleged uttering of the words let him have it to his gun-wielding accomplice, the issue of incitement has been positioned firmly as an object of interest for forensic linguists. An example of a language crime—i.e. an unlawful speech act (as reported by Shuy in Language crimes: The use and abuse of language evidence in the courtroom, Wiley Blackwell, Hoboken, 1993) the features of incitement—formalized as intentionally encouraging or assisting others to commit an offence in the law of England & Wales under section 44 of the Serious Crime Act 2007 (https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2007/27/contents)—have been widely debated by linguists and legal scholars alike. This paper draws on two webinars hosted by The Hunting Office in August 2020, which were subsequently leaked by the Hunt Saboteurs Association. Featuring senior figures from the hunting community addressing a nationwide audience of hunt masters, the webinars led to a police investigation and subsequent prosecution and conviction of one of the main speakers, Mark Hankinson, for encouraging or assisting others to commit an offence under the Hunting Act 2004 . In this paper I explore what, linguistically, is meant by encouraging or assisting . Through corpus-assisted pragmatic and discourse analyses I interrogate the webinars to address the question of how precisely Hankinson implied his encouragement of illegal hunting with dogs. The phenomena of collocation and semantic prosody are crucial for understanding how such meanings came to be attached to the contributions Hankinson makes to the webinars. Moreover the paper will examine the contributions of other speakers and demonstrate that the same incriminating linguistic patterns in Hankinson’s talk are also evident in that of those who were not prosecuted.","PeriodicalId":376841,"journal":{"name":"International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue internationale de Sémiotique juridique","volume":"144 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Intentionally Encouraging or Assisting Others to Commit an Offence: The Anatomy of a Language Crime\",\"authors\":\"Nicci MacLeod\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11196-023-10031-0\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Since at least as far back as the infamous Derek Bentley case of the 1950s in which an unarmed 19-year-old was convicted and executed for murder based on his alleged uttering of the words let him have it to his gun-wielding accomplice, the issue of incitement has been positioned firmly as an object of interest for forensic linguists. An example of a language crime—i.e. an unlawful speech act (as reported by Shuy in Language crimes: The use and abuse of language evidence in the courtroom, Wiley Blackwell, Hoboken, 1993) the features of incitement—formalized as intentionally encouraging or assisting others to commit an offence in the law of England & Wales under section 44 of the Serious Crime Act 2007 (https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2007/27/contents)—have been widely debated by linguists and legal scholars alike. This paper draws on two webinars hosted by The Hunting Office in August 2020, which were subsequently leaked by the Hunt Saboteurs Association. Featuring senior figures from the hunting community addressing a nationwide audience of hunt masters, the webinars led to a police investigation and subsequent prosecution and conviction of one of the main speakers, Mark Hankinson, for encouraging or assisting others to commit an offence under the Hunting Act 2004 . In this paper I explore what, linguistically, is meant by encouraging or assisting . Through corpus-assisted pragmatic and discourse analyses I interrogate the webinars to address the question of how precisely Hankinson implied his encouragement of illegal hunting with dogs. The phenomena of collocation and semantic prosody are crucial for understanding how such meanings came to be attached to the contributions Hankinson makes to the webinars. Moreover the paper will examine the contributions of other speakers and demonstrate that the same incriminating linguistic patterns in Hankinson’s talk are also evident in that of those who were not prosecuted.\",\"PeriodicalId\":376841,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue internationale de Sémiotique juridique\",\"volume\":\"144 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue internationale de Sémiotique juridique\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11196-023-10031-0\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue internationale de Sémiotique juridique","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11196-023-10031-0","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
至少从20世纪50年代臭名昭著的德里克·本特利(Derek Bentley)案开始,一名手无寸铁的19岁男子因涉嫌向持枪的同伙说出“让他去吧”(let him have it)这句话而被判谋杀罪并被处决,煽动问题一直是法医语言学家感兴趣的一个问题。语言犯罪的一个例子是:非法的言语行为(如Shuy在《语言犯罪:法庭上语言证据的使用和滥用》中所述,Wiley Blackwell, Hoboken, 1993),在英国法律中,煽动-形成化为故意鼓励或协助他人犯罪的特征;《2007年严重犯罪法》(https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2007/27/contents)第44条下的威尔士——这在语言学家和法律学者之间引起了广泛的争论。本文借鉴了狩猎办公室于2020年8月举办的两次网络研讨会,这些研讨会随后被狩猎破坏者协会泄露。这些网络研讨会以狩猎界的资深人士为特色,向全国的狩猎大师发表演讲,导致警方进行调查,随后起诉并定罪了主要演讲者之一马克·汉金森,罪名是鼓励或协助他人违反《2004年狩猎法》。在本文中,我探讨了什么是语言学上的鼓励或协助。通过语料库辅助的实用主义和话语分析,我对网络研讨会进行了质询,以解决汉金森如何准确地暗示他鼓励非法狩猎的问题。搭配和语义韵律现象对于理解这些意义是如何与汉金森对网络研讨会的贡献联系在一起的至关重要。此外,本文将研究其他发言者的贡献,并证明汉金森谈话中同样的有罪语言模式在那些未被起诉的人身上也很明显。
Intentionally Encouraging or Assisting Others to Commit an Offence: The Anatomy of a Language Crime
Abstract Since at least as far back as the infamous Derek Bentley case of the 1950s in which an unarmed 19-year-old was convicted and executed for murder based on his alleged uttering of the words let him have it to his gun-wielding accomplice, the issue of incitement has been positioned firmly as an object of interest for forensic linguists. An example of a language crime—i.e. an unlawful speech act (as reported by Shuy in Language crimes: The use and abuse of language evidence in the courtroom, Wiley Blackwell, Hoboken, 1993) the features of incitement—formalized as intentionally encouraging or assisting others to commit an offence in the law of England & Wales under section 44 of the Serious Crime Act 2007 (https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2007/27/contents)—have been widely debated by linguists and legal scholars alike. This paper draws on two webinars hosted by The Hunting Office in August 2020, which were subsequently leaked by the Hunt Saboteurs Association. Featuring senior figures from the hunting community addressing a nationwide audience of hunt masters, the webinars led to a police investigation and subsequent prosecution and conviction of one of the main speakers, Mark Hankinson, for encouraging or assisting others to commit an offence under the Hunting Act 2004 . In this paper I explore what, linguistically, is meant by encouraging or assisting . Through corpus-assisted pragmatic and discourse analyses I interrogate the webinars to address the question of how precisely Hankinson implied his encouragement of illegal hunting with dogs. The phenomena of collocation and semantic prosody are crucial for understanding how such meanings came to be attached to the contributions Hankinson makes to the webinars. Moreover the paper will examine the contributions of other speakers and demonstrate that the same incriminating linguistic patterns in Hankinson’s talk are also evident in that of those who were not prosecuted.