A LINGUISTIC ANALYSIS OF SELECTED NIGERIAN APPELLATE COURT JUDGMENTS
| Format: Ms Word | 1-5 Chapters | Table of Content|
INSTANT PROJECT MATERIAL DOWNLOAD
Study Level: BTech, BSc, BEng, BA, HND, ND or NCE
Amount: ₦3,000.00
ABSTRACT
Scientific study of language and its implication in analysis of court judgement is yet to be given as much scholarly attention as other legal genres.Most of the work that has been done so far on Appellate Court Judgements (ApCJs) focus more on stylisticanalysis and do not investigate the import of meta-linguistic meanings. Correspondingly, most studies on power relations in the courtroom dealt with the asymmetricalrelations of power. As a result, the language of the courtroom has been rated explicit and asymmetric.Therefore, this study investigated the linguistic and the meta-linguistic features in terms of symmetrical and asymmetrical relations of power in selected Nigerian ApCJs.
The study adopted the propositional and meta-propositional frameworks to analyse six APCJs from the Nigerian Weekly Law Reports (1999-2004).Purposive random sampling technique was employed in selecting two leading Judgements from each of the stratified groupings of the three types of appellate judgements: murder cases, human rights abuses and property crimes. Out of the 1,129 sentences that form the data,110
sentences selected through nth sampling technique of one of every sentence form the sample size.Using the Systemic Functional Grammar Theory,the tools of analysis employed were Pragmatic markers (pms), politeness theory, speech act theory and componential analysis, to discover their pragmatic marker types, the face types, lexical components, speech act types and their various implications.
These analyses revealed that although ApCJs were linguistic, they were replete with meta-linguistic contents.Utterances in thetexts comprised two distinct parts: propositional contents (the basic messages); and meta-propositional contents (the linguistically encoded clues exploited by the judges in signalling their potential communicative intentions).The meta-propositional contents were signaled by four variants of pragmatic markers: basic, commentary, discourse, and parallel markers. The linguistic politeness findings revealed that ApCJ asymmetrically relate powers in disallowed appeals but symmetrically relate power in allowed appeals. The Componential analysis revealed that appellate judges achieved
psychological plausibility of their stances through precise diction. The direct speech acts types were retrodictives, assertives, informatives; direct requestives, performatives assertives and verdictives. These showed that the language of ApCJs functions directly for: reporting, asserting, informing, requesting and pronouncing verdicts, while it
indirectly informs,asserts, concedes, directs, requests, dissents and ultimately judges.
Thus, ApCJs themselves depend extensively on re-contextualizedlinguistic elements taken primarily from different texts, especially from the lower court judgements.
In conclusion, the language of ApCJs was not only propositional, meta-propositional, symmetrical but also asymmetrical (four diagonal intricacies that facilitate logical appellate adjudication and verdicts).Applied linguists should critically investigate other meta-linguistic meanings in the legalese.
Keywords: Linguistics, Propositional, Meta-propositional, Appellate Court Judgements.Word Count: 422.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ContentPage
TitlePage i
Certification ii
Dedication iii
Acknowledgments iv
Abstract v
Table of Contents xii
List of Tables
List of Figures xiii
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
1.1.Background to the Study 1
1.2. Statement of the Problem 3
1.3.Objective of the Study 4
1.4 Research Questions 5
1.5 Significance of the Study 5
1.6. Scope of the Study 6
1.7Theoretical Framework 6
1.8. Justification 9
1.8.1 Justification for the Study 9
1.8.2. Justification of the Choice of Data 9
1.8.3 Justification for the Appropriateness of the Theories9
1.9.Operational Definition of Terms
10 CHAPTER TWO:
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
2.0. Introduction 11
2.1 Conceptual Model 11
2.1.1.The Concept of Language 11
2.1.2 Language and Law as Data for Linguistic Study 12
2.1.3 Functions of Language in Law 13
2.2. Linguistics/Linguistic Analysis 15
Content Page
2.2.1. Linguistics as a Science 16
2.2.2 Levels of Linguistic Analysis 17
2.2.3. The Scope of Linguistics 18
2.2.4 Aspects of Linguistics 19
2.3. The Concept of Grammar 20
2.3.1 Systemic Functional Grammar 20
2.3.1.1 Language, a Functional Tool 20
2.3.1.2. The Concept of Text 21
2.3.1.2.Register and Genre Analysis 22
2.3.2.4 Pragmatics. 24
2.4.1. Origin of Pragmatics 24
2.4.2. The Scope of Pragmatics 26
2.4.3. Speech Acts Theory: 27
2.4.4.1 Austin’s Model 30
2.4.4.2 Searle’s Model 31
2.4.4.3. Bach and Harnish’s Model 33
2.4.4.5 Allan’s Speech Acts Model 34
2.4.4.6 Thomas’ Speech Acts Model 36
2.5. Linguistic Politeness Theory 36
2.5.1. Lakoff’s Politeness Model 37
2.5.2 Geofrey Leech’s Politeness Model 37
2.5.3 Brown and Levinson’s Politeness Model
402.6 Pragmatic Markers
482.7 Semantics
552.7.1 Definitions of Semantics
552.7.2 Componential Analysis 56
2.7.2.1Uses of Componential Analysis
562.8.The Courtroom
572.8.1 Types of Courts in Nigeria
582.8.1.1 The Court of Appeal and its Jurisdiction 58
Content Page
2.8.2 Courtroom Language
602.8.2.1 The Nature of Legal English
612.8.2.2 History of Legal English 61
2.8.3. A Review of Studies on Language and Law 66
Law 66
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY
3.0 Introduction 70
3.1 Research Design 70
3.1.1. The Explanatory Mixed Method 70
3.2.Population 71
3.3. Sample Size and Sampling Technique 72
3.4 Method of Data Analysis 72
3.5 Framework of Analysis 73
3.6 Levels and Tools of Analyses 74
CHAPTER FOUR: DATA ANALYSIS
4.0 Introduction 79
4.1The Linguistic Analysis andInterpretation ofJudgement One:
Richard Igago versus the State 79
4.2.The Linguistic Analysis and Interpretation of Judgement Two (B):
Brigadier Adekunle V Rockview Hotel
1264.3 The Linguistic Analysis and Interpretation of Judgement Three (C): Lotus Plastics Limited Versus Nigeria Ports Plc and Elder Demster Agencies.
142 CHAPTER FIVE: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS
5.0.Introduction 156
5.1 Variants of Pragmatic Markers in the Appellate 157
5.1.1 Discussion of the Functions of the Pragmatic Markers 160
5.2 Findings on the Face Saving and Face Threatening Acts 161
5.3 The Significance of the Face Saving and Face Threatening Acts 163
5.4 Findings,Componential Analysis 163
5.5 The Speech Acts Types in the Appellate Judgements 164
5.5.1 The Direct Speech Acts 164
5.5.2. The Indirect Speech Acts Types in the Judgements 165
5.6. Discussions on the Import of the Preponderant Speech acts 166
Content Page
5.7. Linguistic Divergences between Appellate Courts
JudgementsAllowed, Partly Allowed And Disallowed.168
5.8 Summary of the Findings 170
CHAPTER SIX:SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND
RECOMMENDATIONS
6.0 Introduction
1726.1 Summary
1726.2 Conclusion
1736.3 Recommendations 175
6.4 Suggestion for Further Studies 176
6.5. Contributions to Knowledge 176
References 178
USE THIS MATERIALS AS A GUIDE FOR YOUR PERSONAL RESEARCH WORK (IF PROPERLY CITED)
PAY ₦3,000 HERE TO DOWNLOAD MATERIALS
Account Number: 0709546102
Access Bank: Savings
Account Name: Emmanuel Idorenyin Samuel.