英文警察书面报告的评估

IF 0.1 N/A HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Sanja Ćetković
{"title":"英文警察书面报告的评估","authors":"Sanja Ćetković","doi":"10.31902//fll.39.2022.15","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper deals with the use of evaluative devices in police written reports. A police officer, as a representative of an institution, bears in mind the main goal of a report, i.e. presenting and explaining facts to the legal audience and convincing them of the propriety of the decisions s/he made in execution of his duties. As far as his actions and decisions are concerned, s/he expects as low input of contradictory opinions as possible. Police reports ought to be strictly informative. This fact defines their language in terms of impersonality and objective reference to sources of information. In this respect, direct assessments of facts and authorial voice are highly suppressed in the texts, although the reports inevitably reflect personal involvement. Objectivity and distancing are expected and presumed by both the author and the audience. However, this stereotype often confronts with indirect or covert means by which the author positions himself/herself with regard to the information given in the reports. This short analysis has found that police officers are very careful when it comes to expressing their own interpretation of events, other people’s behavior or propositions. They avoid speculating, making subjective judgments without the support of solid evidence. Police officers often rely on perceptual type of evidence for their claims (I could clearly see, hear, smell, observe) and consider such sensory experience more substantial. Also, they are prone to making negative rather than positive evaluations, criticizing rather than affirming other people’s behavior and actions. Such evaluation is rarely given explicitly, but frequently permeates the context.","PeriodicalId":40358,"journal":{"name":"Folia Linguistica et Litteraria","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"EVALUATION IN POLICE WRITTEN REPORTS IN ENGLISH\",\"authors\":\"Sanja Ćetković\",\"doi\":\"10.31902//fll.39.2022.15\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper deals with the use of evaluative devices in police written reports. A police officer, as a representative of an institution, bears in mind the main goal of a report, i.e. presenting and explaining facts to the legal audience and convincing them of the propriety of the decisions s/he made in execution of his duties. As far as his actions and decisions are concerned, s/he expects as low input of contradictory opinions as possible. Police reports ought to be strictly informative. This fact defines their language in terms of impersonality and objective reference to sources of information. In this respect, direct assessments of facts and authorial voice are highly suppressed in the texts, although the reports inevitably reflect personal involvement. Objectivity and distancing are expected and presumed by both the author and the audience. However, this stereotype often confronts with indirect or covert means by which the author positions himself/herself with regard to the information given in the reports. This short analysis has found that police officers are very careful when it comes to expressing their own interpretation of events, other people’s behavior or propositions. They avoid speculating, making subjective judgments without the support of solid evidence. Police officers often rely on perceptual type of evidence for their claims (I could clearly see, hear, smell, observe) and consider such sensory experience more substantial. Also, they are prone to making negative rather than positive evaluations, criticizing rather than affirming other people’s behavior and actions. Such evaluation is rarely given explicitly, but frequently permeates the context.\",\"PeriodicalId\":40358,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Folia Linguistica et Litteraria\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Folia Linguistica et Litteraria\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.31902//fll.39.2022.15\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"N/A\",\"JCRName\":\"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Folia Linguistica et Litteraria","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31902//fll.39.2022.15","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"N/A","JCRName":"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文论述了评价手段在警察书面报告中的运用。作为一个机构的代表,警官要牢记报告的主要目标,即向法律受众介绍和解释事实,并让他们相信他在履行职责时做出的决定是恰当的。就他的行动和决定而言,他/她希望尽可能减少矛盾意见的输入。警方的报告应该严格提供信息。这一事实以客观和客观的信息来源来定义他们的语言。在这方面,对事实的直接评估和作者的声音在文本中被高度压制,尽管报告不可避免地反映了个人的参与。客观性和距离是作者和观众所期望和假设的。然而,这种陈规定型观念往往面临着间接或隐蔽的手段,提交人通过这些手段对报告中提供的信息进行定位。这项简短的分析发现,警察在表达自己对事件、他人行为或主张的解释时非常谨慎。他们避免猜测,在没有确凿证据支持的情况下做出主观判断。警察经常依赖感知类型的证据来证明他们的说法(我能清楚地看到、听到、闻到、观察到),并认为这种感知体验更为实质。此外,他们倾向于做出负面而非正面的评价,批评而非肯定他人的行为和行动。这种评价很少明确给出,但经常渗透到上下文中。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
EVALUATION IN POLICE WRITTEN REPORTS IN ENGLISH
This paper deals with the use of evaluative devices in police written reports. A police officer, as a representative of an institution, bears in mind the main goal of a report, i.e. presenting and explaining facts to the legal audience and convincing them of the propriety of the decisions s/he made in execution of his duties. As far as his actions and decisions are concerned, s/he expects as low input of contradictory opinions as possible. Police reports ought to be strictly informative. This fact defines their language in terms of impersonality and objective reference to sources of information. In this respect, direct assessments of facts and authorial voice are highly suppressed in the texts, although the reports inevitably reflect personal involvement. Objectivity and distancing are expected and presumed by both the author and the audience. However, this stereotype often confronts with indirect or covert means by which the author positions himself/herself with regard to the information given in the reports. This short analysis has found that police officers are very careful when it comes to expressing their own interpretation of events, other people’s behavior or propositions. They avoid speculating, making subjective judgments without the support of solid evidence. Police officers often rely on perceptual type of evidence for their claims (I could clearly see, hear, smell, observe) and consider such sensory experience more substantial. Also, they are prone to making negative rather than positive evaluations, criticizing rather than affirming other people’s behavior and actions. Such evaluation is rarely given explicitly, but frequently permeates the context.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Folia Linguistica et Litteraria
Folia Linguistica et Litteraria HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
0.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
29
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信