法庭对话与法律事实建构研究

A Study on Legal Facts Constructed via Courtroom Dialogue

法律事实的处理是庭审的关键之一,得到司法界长期重视,也得到法学研究者的广泛关注。法律事实介乎客观事实和裁判事实之间,由庭审各方参与人共同建构,具有客观性,也具有主观性,较之客观事实和裁判事实都更为复杂。法律事实的建构除了借助非语言手段外,主要诉诸语言手段。其中,在法庭调查和法庭辩论部分,各方之间展开的对话是事实呈现和处理的主要手段,因此是从语言角度对法律事实建构研究的重要切入点。本文借助语料库,研究庭审法律事实建构的过程、特点和规律。分析从对话角色的三种方式展开:通过分析自述,侧重研究事实的呈现;通过分析交互,主要探究事实的共建;通过分析言他,侧重了解事实的认定。研究表明,庭审各方在建构法律事实的过程中表现出不同的态度和处理方法,他们在处理语篇信息时也表现出不同特点。

Legal facts are a focus of courtroom interaction, which has been well explored by professionals and researchers of law. They are the intermediate variety between objective facts and judicial facts. Legal facts are co-constructed by courtroom participants, such that they are both objective and subjective, and more complex than objective and judicial facts. The construction of legal facts requires mainly verbal means besides non-verbal means. In the investigation and debating sessions, the dialogue between participants is a main means for presentation and processing of legal facts, which becomes the concern of researchers. This paper, based on CLIPS, studies the process, features and regularities of legal fact construction. Analyses are done from three perspectives： via self-expressive speech analysis, presentation of facts will be revealed; via interaction analysis, co-construction tackled; and via third person reference analysis, ascertainment of facts detected. It shows that courtroom participants have their different attitudes and ways of handling facts and there are individualized features in processing discourse information.