A Brief Probe into the Function of Context and the Principles of Legal Conversat
开篇：润墨网以专业的文秘视角，为您筛选了一篇A Brief Probe into the Function of Context and the Principles of Legal Conversat范文，如需获取更多写作素材，在线客服老师一对一协助。欢迎您的阅读与分享！
【Abstract】This paper utilizes the conversational inference theory in linguistic to elaborates two major elements of legal conversational reasoning： context and conversation principle. The legal principle of conversation mainly refers to the principle of legal conversation parties should comply with，mainly including the cooperative principle and objective principle. They are important factors to ensure the validity of reasoning. Only comply with the principles，the conversation will be smooth and the conversational implicature will be firmed and accepted. The conclusion of legal conversational reasoning will be more validity if the reasoning complying with the context.
【Key words】 context；conversation principle；legal conversation reasoning；validity
1. Introduction
China’s current judicial process is facing serious validity crisis. If the validity of legal reasoning can be ensured in the judicial process，the current judicial crisis can be largely eliminated. Legal conversational reasoning attempts to digest justice crisis through the immanent rationality.
Legal conversational reasoning infer the conversational implicature in a particular session context，and the legal facts received from the interaction between several subjects are more intuitive and accuracy which will then ensure the validity and acceptability of judicial decisions. In legal conversation，the party A and party B must obey the cooperative principle in order to make legal session smoothly and successfully. Speaker and receiver should comply with the principles of cooperation and jointly promote legal conversation. In language conversation，the objective principle controls the content and rhythm as a whole.
Because legal conversation pays attention to the pragmatic meaning in specific context and the human cognitive，from the beginning，the legal conversational reasoning not only provides a new research perspective and makes the legal reasoning from grand research to the subtle.
2. The Context of the Legal Conversation
2.1 The Overview of Context
Context is also called verbal communication environment. G. Frege was the first to use the concept of context to explain the meaning of language. He said “Only in the context of the statement rather than in isolated words，can we find real meaning”（qtd. in Tu 149）.
The concept of context has a development process. The earliest researches of context just stay in semantic level. Modern language philosophy shows that there is a close bond between the meaning between the context of utterance，and the meaning of words always changes with its context. “On the one hand，context restricts the possible domain of interpretation of meaning and gives it the explanation of connotation on the other hand”（Brown and Yule 45）.
Legal conversation is the narration in specific legal context，the parties also need interpret the speakers’ intention and meaning of statements in specific context，thus they can communicate reasonably. In specific judicial application，the judiciaries must accurately understand and grasp speakers’ true meaning according to the context，and then deduce a reasonable conclusion.For example： Here is a wonderful legal conversation in the movie “Legally Blonde”，defenders overturned the perjury of a witness according to conversational context：
Defender： Miss Windham，did you hear a shot fire？
Witness： No，I was in the shower.
Defender： So，sometime in the 20 minutes that you were in the shower，your was shot.
Witness： I guess.
Defender： Your father was shot while you were in the shower，but you didn’t hear the shot because you were in the shower？
Witness： Yes，I was washing my hair.
Defender： Miss Windham，what had you done earlier that day？
Witness： I got up，got a latte，went to the gym，got a perm and came home.
Defender： Were you got in the shower？ Miss Windham，had you ever gotten a perm before？
Witness： Yes.
Defender： How man would you say？
Witness： Two a year since I was 12. You do math.
…
Defender： And wouldn’t somebody who’s had，say，30 perms before in their life be well aware of this rule？ And if in fact you weren’t washing your hair as I suspect，because your curls are still intact. Wouldn’t you have heard the gun shot？ And if in fact you had heard the gunshot.（The speed got faster and faster.）Brook Windham wouldn’t have had time to hide the gun before you got downstairs…
In this case，obviously，the defense lawyer analyzes not only the literal meaning of witness’s words but also the words real meaning in specific context. It is easy，reasonable and normal to understand the words’ literal meaning without the specific context. But as a fashion lady，the defense lawyer has a good knowledge of hair care. According to the witness’s words，she is an experienced girl after having her hair permed so many times，but she said the words that she got a perm and then took a shower. It’s logical to understand witness’s words from the perspective of not only the literal meaning but also the legal intent.Ttherefore，the defense lawyer caught witness tripping and won the case.
Legal discourse always carries too much contextual factors. Therefore，the understanding of words should base on both the literal meaning and true meaning in specific context.
2.2 The Constitution of Context
Context is also called verbal communication environment. He Zhaoxiong thinks context can be divided into two aspects： linguistic context and non-linguistic context（69）.
contextlinguistic context
non-linguisticcontext
explicit：time and place，communicative object，occasion，natural environment
implicit：socio-cultural psychology，customs，code of conduct，ethical value…
2.2.1 Linguistic context
Linguistic context refers to the factor affecting the meaning of words from the perspective of language and characters. It mainly refers to the discourse context. The understanding of the words are not isolated，it always has a context. Only understand the meaning of context，can we correctly understand the words’ meaning. Legal language is the carrier of expressing the case，language use is often regarded as a linear order process in which the relation of these legal language symbols as material carriers is called language context.
For example：
公诉人：你们公司的主要业务是什么？
被告人：做未上市股权的转让。
公诉人：那你租借营业执照的目的是干什么？
被告人：和以前的业务工作一样。
Obviously，the above questions limit the answers below，and the above provide the context to articles below. Therefore，we can understand the “work” means transferring unlisted equity（Liao 156）.
2.2.2 Non-linguistic context
Non-linguistic context refers to the factor that is not non-verbal and affect discourse understanding. Namely it is the environment that can influence session behaviors in addition to language. For example，It’s easy for a person who understands British culture when a British say to you： “Its a nice day today.” He or she knows it is the way in which British people say “hello”，but for a people who do not know British culture may think this person is very strange. In general，the influence of linguistic context on conversational reasoning is less than that of non-linguistic context. According to the different forms of expression，non-linguistic context can be divided into two kinds： explicit and implicit.
2.2.2.1 Explicit linguistic context
Explicit linguistic context refers to things or events that the current speaker can directly perceive，and they will have direct impact on conversation behaviors，such as time and place. All legal acts are inseparable from the specific time and place including legal conversation.
For example：in a hospital
顾客：抓了没有？
医生：抓了（边说边抵触药包）
The situation will be very different if it take place at the police station.
2.2.2.2 Implicit non-linguistic context
Recessive non-linguistic context refers to the factors that the conversation participants cannot directly feel and are secluded，and it has indirect impact on the understanding of words and the process of conversation，such as cultural environment. The idea of culture environment here is not the international different cultures but the culture of different areas in China. Our country has 56 ethnic groups that have a variety of national characteristics. Different regions have different psychological and cultural environment. We should interpret conversation reasonably according to the local culture，customs and habits. For people living in the mountains whose ancestors living on hunting，we should understand that their behaviors in a certain cultural context. Only like this it is rational.
2.3 The function of context in Legal Conversational Reasoning
Zhou Liquan once proposed “Context restricts the whole conversation，and it is the parameter shouldn’t be ignored of expressing and understanding”（514）. Its clear how important context it is in legal conversational reasoning. Context affects not only the understanding of words in legal conversation but also the legal cinversational reasoning process.
2.3.1 To promote the correct understanding of legal discourse
The correct understanding of legal discourse refers to the the meanings that abstract semantics gain from specific context. Language is the carrier of information，it can not only carry syntactic and semantic information but also carry additional content such as pragmatics，society，and culture（Steven 26）. Context has effect on correctly understanding of words’ meaning in the following aspects：
（1）Context can eliminate ambiguity of words
Natural language is vague and uncertain，so it is very complicated. Wittgenstein once said： “language is a labyrinth full of branch roads”（246）. Due to the interferences from the language and non-language，ambiguities appear in people’s communicative words. Context has the function of eliminating the ambiguities.
（2） Context help listener deduce speaker’s implication of utterance.
Generally speaking，we can understand the meaning of words according to the literal meaning of conversation. But，in the process of reasoning，we can’t understand the conversation from the literal meaning of words but to find the contextual meaning to argue against and persuade the other party.
（3）Context can reveal some information that speaker is trying to hide.
For example：
公诉人：“你为什么要搞爆炸？”
被告：“我只想吓唬吓唬他们。”
According to the context，we know the defendant is a person with full capacity and he can predict the severe consequences. From the defendants answers，we can deduce that he wants to escape the legal responsibility and hide his sins.
2.3.2 To promote legal conversational reasoning process
In the process of the whole legal conversation，context can not only promote party A and party B correctly understand the meaning of conversation but also help them find their own turn of communication to speak，and thus promote the progress of legal conversation until the parties reached a consensus.
3. The Principle of Legal Conversation
3.1 The Cooperative Principle of Legal Conversation
In Logic and Conversation，linguistis logicians Grice studys the general regulations of the conversation，he does not think people’s conversation is composed of a string of unrelated words，otherwise it isn’t reasonable（45）. Conversation is often cooperative，at least to a certain extent. The conversation participants admit one or a set of common goals to a certain extent，or accept a common direction at least. So，conversation is cooperative. Cooperative principle is： “to make your words，in the stage which the conversation occurs，are in accordance with the recognized goal or direction of the conversation you take part in”（45）. On the basis of cooperative principle，he subdivides cooperative principle into four criteria. Namely they are quantity standard，quality standard，relation atandard and manner standard. The conversation that satisfied the four criteria must also conform to cooperative principle.
（1）“Quantity standard” means that the information of conversation can’t be too large or too little in the process of conversation，and it’s good to provide the required quantity. In the process of investigation，investigators often interrogate suspects for a long time. If some suspects remain silent or do a large number of chicaneries，and these behaviors will not conform to quantity standard.
（2）“Quality standard” means that in the process of the session，parties should try to tell the truth not to lie which let the whole conversation process are reliable. The people who commit fraud are less likely to tell the truth. They usually fictionalize facts and hide truth. Their breaking quality standard leads to their crime.
（3）“Relation standard” means that the conversation content should be relevant and irrelevant answers are not allowed.
（4）“Manner standard” means that the process of conversation should be clear and ambiguities are not allowed.
Party A and party B should coopertate effectively and correctly in legal conversation，and legal conversation shall conform to cooperative principle. In addition，cooperative principle also means that both parties should adopt some effective measures to promote reasoning process when their own goals conflict in legal conversation.
3.2 The Objective Principle of Legal Conversation
Engels once said “ It is the people with consciousness，thought or motivated by the passion of action that do activities in the field of social history to purse a particular purpose. All the things happens with conscious intent and expected purpose”（Roberto 15）. The things human do including discourse acts are all pushed by a conscious purpose. This purposeful conversational principle is referred to the “objective principle”（Liao 365）.
“ From the perspective of characteristics，legal conversation，at least to some extent，is the result of joint efforts. Each participant can realize a common purpose to some extent，or at least a direction accepted by each other. This purpose or direction may be identified from the start or gradually formed in process of communication”（Grice 45）. Legal conversation is a series of communicative action aiming at achieving the purpose of the conversation through the cooperation between the parties. Purpose is the starting point and end-result of law conversation. Legal conversation often begins with a certain purpose. In the process of investigation，the purpose of investigators’ conversation is to determine that criminal suspects commit crime，and the purpose of criminal suspects is to deny their behaviors； In the courts，participants have a common goal in advance. In a criminal trial，defense lawyers’ and the defendants’ purpose are consistent，and the purposes of defendant and prosecutor are inconsistent. It is the purposes of legal conversation that guides the parties to promote the process of legal conversation according to their purposes. The most ideal result is to let each parties adopt your own opinions or achieve a common purpose in rational discussion in the end on the basis of compromise.
3.3 The Functions of The Two principles in legal conversational Reasoning
3.3.1 The Function of Cooperative Principle in Legal Conversation
Cooperative principle is the principle participants obey in legal conversation in order to facilitate the communication smoothly. Although some condition violate the cooperative principle in the judicial practice，however，cooperation is participants overall tendency in legal conversation. Both parties in legal conversation wish the other to tell the truth，namely to obey quality standard； to speak related words，namely to obey relation standard； to talk concisely，namely to obey manner standard； not to say superfluous words，namely to obey quantity standard. In the judicial process，in order to ensure the smooth operation of legal conversation，the judiciary may even specially remind participants of some related standads of cooperative principle，or participants will also adopt some policies to require the other to adhere to cooperative principle.
In general，cooperative principle plays an important role in legal conversational reasoning. On the one hand，we can obtain the true meaning of legal conversation and speakers’ real intention according to the principle of cooperation； On the other hand，the cooperative principle we can profoundly feel legal speech acts and be clear about the legal intention of conversational parties.
3.3.2 The Function of Objective Principle Legal in The Conversation
Conversation begins with a purpose. If there is no purpose between conversational parties，conversation won’t exist. There is tight bond between purpose and words. In every concrete practice，the purpose is both the starting point and the ending point. It practically determine the direction of action and dominate the whole process of action，and manifests itself in the results achieved at the end of the action（Liao 432）. Legal conversational reasoning is also purpose-oriented reasoning. Objective principle controls content and the rhythm in legal conversation as a whole. Even the cooperative principles of legal conversation should obey objective principle. In legal conversation，whether cooperate or not is tha choice of the conversational parties which is controlled by the purpose. Objective principle is the precondition of the application of cooperative principles.
4. Conclusion
Just as the points in Just Words： Law，Language and Power，“ Conflicts and disputes are resolved in legal operation. If law does not achieve the ideal that establishes it，the root of its failures and problems must be in the details of law application which is composed of language. Tens of thousands of “dramas” performed every day in courtroom are consist of language this tool. Therefore，it’s is of great significance to study the discourse of these “dramas” and the details of their language （John and William 32）. In the process of legal interactionthe，both the addresser putting forward views and the hearer making a respondce will consciously or unconsciously conduct legal conversational reasoning and put the theories of pragmatics into legal conversational reasoning.