000			02156cam a2200253 4500500
005			20250121092209.0
041			_afre
042			_adc
100	1	0	_aVincent, Diane _eauthor
245	0	0	_aMisinterpretation, Plagiary, Insult and Defamation: Objects of Litigation and Materials for Linguists.
260			_c2010.
500			_a80
520			_a"The legal system rests on the confrontation between discourses. Defense and Accusation are obliged to present adversative positions. That discursive dimension is even more real when what is being judged is a 'word crime', i.e. when speech is at the very center of the litigation. The rules regulating prohibited language are codified in various laws, but the interpretations of what can and cannot be said are as numerous as they are subjective. When investigating the legal domain linguistically, schematically three sub-sets of research appear: 1) everything that concerns writing up legal texts, which includes anticipating the potential interpretations of utterances ; 2) research concerning the validity of proof based on the speech of witnesses or the accused; 3) contentious discourses, whether the interpretation of a damaging utterance ( e.g. slander) or the resemblance between two texts (plagiary). It is this domain of contentious discourse that is explored here, by describing the requests for expertise to which the author was led to respond, and the conceptual and methodological tools deployed so as to provide a lawyer with a satisfactory answer to his/her question. In conclusion, an ethical reflection on the tensions between academic practices, that depend on continuous questioning, and presenting proof, which does not tolerate placing facts in perspective. "
690			_aDiscourse analysis
690			_aspeech act
690			_aApplied linguistics
690			_ainsult
690			_aethics
690			_aSociolinguistics
690			_aplagiary
690			_alitigation
786	0		_nLangage et société | o 132 | 2 | 2010-07-23 | p. 35-50 | 0181-4095
856	4	1	_uhttps://shs.cairn.info/journal-langage-et-societe-2010-2-page-35?lang=en&redirect-ssocas=7080
999			_c513508 _d513508