Verified types of linguistic analysis of disputed texts: Acceptable methods of linguistic expertise
A.V. Bastrikov*, E.M. Bastrikova**, E.S. Palekha ***
Kazan Federal University, Kazan, 420008 Russia
E-mail: *Alexei.Bastrikov@kpfu.ru, **Elena.Bastrikova@kpfu.ru, ***katerina.paleha@gmail.com
Received June 29, 2017
Abstract
The paper is devoted to the urgent problem of objectification and validation of methods for carrying out a complex linguo-expert analysis of disputed mass media texts with various semantic content (in cases of defense of business honor and dignity, incitement of inter-ethnic discord, etc.).
The current methods of complex text analysis and the approaches to their adaptation in the linguistic-legal sphere is the object of investigation in the paper. The problems of working with metatexts, hypertexts, texts of mixed sign nature (verbal and non-verbal) have been also discussed. The efficiency and validity of the traditional linguistic methods has been estimated. A new approach has been introduced to the complex analysis of contentious texts, which combines the elements of classical language and classical text analysis, semantic-functional approach, discursive theory, and some methods of general humanities analytical and synthetic procedures (such as content analysis, intent analysis). In addition, a new unit of analysis has been singled out – a semantic track, which allows specialists to work with meanings of different sign nature and different levels of semantic design of the text. Particular attention has been paid to the ways and means of analyzing the text content of Internet resources (for example, pages of communities in social networks) and texts of gradual temporary deployment (a series of videos). The illustrative material includes the texts taken from the author's experience of linguistic expertise in the recent years.
The presented results have a great importance for the linguo-expert theory and practice.
Keywords: linguistic expertise, complex analysis, discourse analysis, content analysis, intent analysis, hypertext, semantic track
References
1. Palekha E.S. Evolution of directive discourse: Ways of formation of aggressive modality. Uchenyye Zapiski Kazanskogo Universiteta. Seriya Gumanitarnyye Nauki, 2012, vol. 154, no. 5, pp. 179–188. (In Russian)
2. Yakovleva E.A., Ablin M.V. Principles of forensic linguistic expertise in forensic linguistics. Filologicheskie Nauki. Voprosy Teorii i Praktiki, 2014, no. 6, pt. 1, pp. 208–213. (In Russian)
3. Shchepetil'nikov V.N. The global Internet network as a step towards building the information soci-ety: Criminal law aspects. VII Mezhdunar. konf. “Pravo i Internet” (Moskva, 27–28 okt. 2005 g.): Stendovye doklady sektsii “Informatsionnaya bezopasnost' ” [Proc. VII Int. Conf. “Law and Inter-net” (Moscow, Oct. 27–28, 2005). Poster Presentation of the Section “Information Security”]. Available at: http://www.ifap.ru/pi/07/stand.htm. (In Russian)
4. Rossinskaya E.R. Forensic Expertise in Civil, Arbitrary, Administrative, and Criminal Law. Gl. 9: Stadii sudebno-ekspertnogo issledovaniya. Zaklyuchenie eksperta [Ch. 9: Stages of Forensic Exper-tise. Expert Evidence]. Moscow, Norma, 2006. Available at: http://www.adhdportal.com/book_ 3789_chapter_25_Pitannja_dlja_samokontrolju.html. (In Russian)
For citation: Bastrikov A.V., Bastrikova E.M., Palekha E.S. Verified types of linguistic analy-sis of disputed texts: Admissible methods of linguistic expertise. Uchenye Zapiski Kazanskogo Universiteta. Seriya Gumanitarnye Nauki, 2017, vol. 159, no. 5, pp. 1358–1368. (In Russian)
The content is available under the license Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
