No description available.

The advent of medical journalism was initially felt to be an answer to the problem of communicating health and medical information to the public. However, currently, there is a concern among scientists with the way the media, newspapers in particular, communicate health and medical information. The concern of the medical community in particular and of the scientific community in general is that newspapers ‘distort’ health and medical information. In order to deal with this ‘perceived’ problem, scientists adopt a mechanical view and propose to solve it by issuing guidelines for journalists to follow when writing health and medical news. Close investigation of journalistic practice shows that many of the proposed guidelines are already present in journalistic practice, and yet, the concern for ‘distortion’ remains. The overall aim of the thesis is to contribute to this issue. Adopting an Applied Linguistics perspective, more specifically, using the discourse analytic methodology of Genre Analysis, the thesis demonstrates that Health and Medical News Reports are first and foremost news stories and that the proposed guidelines fail to achieve the envisaged changes precisely because they seem to be ignorant of this essential reality. In order to reach this conclusion, Genre Analysis is applied to different types of texts with a view to comparing their structures. Some of the text types used have already been described in the literature, but others are analysed for the first time in this thesis. Thus, comparison is made between Health and Medical Research Articles and Health and Medical News Reports, between Popularised Health and Medical Texts and Health and Medical News Reports, between News Texts and Health and Medical News Reports and between Health and Medical Press Releases and Health and Medical News Reports. Genre Analysis shows that Health and Medical News Reports are first and foremost news stories and, therefore, that the discourse of ‘distortion’ is somewhat ‘misguided’. However, because of its nature as a structural analysis, Genre Analysis leaves one important question unanswered, namely the ‘why’ of the discourse of distortion. Although it is beyond the scope of this thesis to investigate this question, in the thesis, it is indicated that a more context-sensitive analysis, using Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) for example, could fruitfully be pursued. This thesis draws on four types of data. The main data set consists of Health and Medical News Reports published in The Herald and The Guardian between April and May 2007, where possible, corresponding press releases were collected. Email interviews were conducted with authors whose research was reported in the two newspapers. Finally, ethnographic observation of newsrooms and face-to-face semi-structured interviews were conducted with journalists who wrote the reports over a period of one week.

This study scrutinizes parody in Stoppard&rsquo / s Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead, The Real Inspector Hound, and Dogg&rsquo / s Hamlet, Cahoot&rsquo / s Macbeth. After a historical survey of the definitions of parody with a stress on its definitions in our era, this study puts forward its definition of parody which is mainly based on Bakhtin&rsquo / s dialogic criticism. Parody then can be defined as a deliberate imitation or transformation of a socio-cultural product that takes a stance towards its original subject of imitation. Based on the original subject of parody, three kinds of parody are distinguished: genre, specific, and discourse. Following determining the kinds of parody that each of the aforementioned plays exhibits, this study expounds how Stoppard applies parody of the characters, plots, and themes in relation to their original subjects of parody. Later, a close critical study of these parodies will be conducted to elaborate on their functions and significances in each of the plays, their relations with and efficacy in the thematic context of the plays, the techniques used to achieve them, and how far they are applied in line with or opposite to the post-modern&rsquo / s ideas.

Made available in DSpace on 2016-06-02T20:25:15Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 4762.pdf: 1449239 bytes, checksum: 0d0fc51f7a33134ecee81d45330bd6cc (MD5) Previous issue date: 2012-04-04 / According to the census that was made in Brazil in 2000, around 5.800.000 people have some degree of hearing loss or deafness. Among them, the numbers of deaf people who don t hear anything, classified as incapable of hearing and that use the sign language to communicate was 176.067 people. Our research aims to analyze the images discursively that the official documents compose about this important part of society that can not hear. To do this, we will consider the lexical choices made, through words or statements, when those document refer to the deaf. It was mobilized the notion of Imaginary Formation, which will be used to analyze the build images from the self image and the deaf people, subject of the discourse. We still propose to analyze these documents as genre of discourse, as it was such proposed by Mikail Bakhtin (1997), because we believe that if we ignore the peculiarities of the genre that we will be led to formalism and abstraction, to disregard the historicity of the study and the relation between language and life. From this notion, we will also discuss the scenographies permeating these documents, in order to understand the tone of the discourse. To compose the corpus, some laws or decrees were chosen dealing with several issues about deaf cause such as: the sign language, their accessibility to media, theaters, public institutions, education and health, among others. These documents produced by government departments have a normative nature that aims to regulate specific actions for these subjects, especially about the guarantee of their rights. From this perspective, we will take as theoretical and methodological focus the Discourse Analysis of French orientation and the Dialogical Analysis of Discourse, through Michel Pêcheux, Dominique Maingueneau and Mikail Bakhtin studies. / De acordo com o censo realizado pelo IBGE no Brasil no ano de 2000, em torno de 5.800.000 pessoas possuem algum grau de deficiência auditiva ou surdez. Dentre essas, o número de surdos profundos, recenseados como incapazes de ouvir e que se valem da língua de sinais para se comunicar era de 176.067 pessoas. Nossa pesquisa tem como objetivo analisar discursivamente as imagens que os documentos oficiais constroem a respeito dessa parcela importante da sociedade desprovida de audição. Para isso, consideraremos as escolhas lexicais feitas, seja por meio de palavras ou por meio de enunciados, na maneira de se referir ao surdo. Foi mobilizado o conceito de formação imaginária, por meio do qual analisaremos as imagens construídas a partir da imagem de si e dos surdos, objeto do discurso. Propomo-nos, ainda, analisar esses documentos enquanto gênero do discurso, tal qual proposto por Mikail Bakhtin (1997), pois corroboramos a ideia de que, ao ignorar as particularidades de gênero que assinalam a variedade do discurso leva-se ao formalismo e à abstração, desconsideramos a historicidade do estudo e a relação entre a língua e a vida. A partir disso, levantaremos também as cenografias que permeiam esses documentos, a fim de compreendermos o tom desse discurso. Para compor o corpus, foram selecionados leis ou decretos que lidam com as diversas questões sobre a causa do surdo, a saber: a língua de sinais, sua acessibilidade aos meios de comunicação, a teatros, instituições públicas, o acesso à educação, à saúde, dentre outros. Tais documentos produzidos por instâncias governamentais possuem um caráter de normatização que objetivam regular as ações específicas para esses sujeitos, sobretudo quanto a garantia de seus direitos. Nessa perspectiva, tomamos como enfoque teórico metodológico a Análise do Discurso de orientação francesa e a Análise Dialógica do Discurso por meio dos estudos de Michel Pêcheux, Dominique Maingueneau e Mikail Bakhtin.

Cette recherche vise à comprendre de quelle manière l’exploitation des sites du Net participatif et de leur dimension sociale peut favoriser les apprentissages en classe de langue. Notre recherche s’appuie sur deux expériences de terrain réalisées auprès de deux publics différents, un public en FLE en 2012 et en 2013, à l’Alliance française Paris Île-de-France, et un public faiblement ou non scolarisé, en 2014, aux Cours Municipaux pour Adultes de la Ville de Paris, en post-alphabétisation. Dans une approche sociocritique, nous avons analysé des dispositifs pédagogiques dans lesquels les apprenants ont posté des messages sur des forums de discussion, des avis et des commentaires sur différents sites dont TripAdvisor, YouTube, Doctissimo, Le Parisien. Essentiellement qualitative, notre analyse a tout particulièrement interrogé la prise en compte de la dimension interactionnelle et sociale du Net participatif qui est sa caractéristique et son avantage principal. L’expérience en FLE nous a permis, en adoptant une approche émique, de repérer un certain nombre de conditions, favorables et défavorables, à l’intégration du Net participatif en classe de langue, de montrer le rôle déterminant de la culture d’usage dans l’appropriation de l’outil par les apprenants et de mettre en avant les notions de besoin et d’utilité de la tâche. À partir de ces conclusions, nous montrons qu’en post-alphabétisation les sites du Net participatif utilisés semblent avoir répondu aux besoins des apprenants faiblement ou non scolarisés. Grâce à la socialisation des écrits qu’il permet, et à l’engouement certain qu’il suscite chez ce public, le Web participatif, crée un effet d’entraînement dans les tâches de lecture-écriture. Nous émettons l’hypothèse que l’hybridité entre oral et écrit et entre langage et action des messages de forums de discussion et des sections commentaires lève certaines inhibitions généralement constatées chez ce public et facilite le processus d’écriture. Ainsi, nous avons repéré sur ce deuxième terrain le potentiel du Net participatif en tant que levier d’acquisition de la littératie traditionnelle et numérique chez un public en insécurité scripturale, et examiné les liens synergiques qui peuvent se créer entre ces deux littératies. Nous dégageons l’intérêt heuristique que présente le Net participatif dans les tâches de lecture-écriture, quel que soit le public, et nous montrons les avantages d’une démarche centrée sur l’apprenant. / The aim of this research was to understand and evaluate the use of some sites of the participative web, viewed in their social dimension, to meet the learning needs of learners in language courses. Our study was based on two field experiments conducted on two different types of audiences, one in 2012 and 2013 with French as a Foreign Language (FFL) students at the Alliance française Paris Île-de-France, and another in 2014 with learners with low levels of education at the Cours Municipaux d’Adultes de la Ville de Paris (adult training provider of the City of Paris) in a post–literacy programme. Following a sociocritical approach, we worked on case-based scenarios in which learners were asked to post messages on discussion forums and in the comments section of online magazines on websites such as TripAdvisor, YouTube, Doctissimo and Le Parisien. In a qualitative analysis, we took into account the interactional and social dimensions of the Web 2.0 which are its distinctive features and main advantages. In FFL our experiment enabled us, through an emic approach, to pinpoint some conditions necessary for the effective use of the participative web in language courses, to show the decisive role of culture of use in tool appropriation and to underline the two notions of need and purpose. Our first results led us to show in a second experiment that in post-literacy programmes, the participative websites seemed to answer the needs of learners with low levels of education. Socialization of writing skills and the keen interest these tools arouse in this type of audience were the main factors of improved achievements. The fact that the participative web seemed to improve the performance of reading and writing tasks leads us to formulate the hypothesis that the hybridization of written and oral languages and of language and action found in discussion forum messages and comments section frees this second type of learners from some of the anxieties generally observed at a low education level and helps the writing process. We suggest from our findings that the participative web is a potential lever for the acquisition of traditional and digital literacies in learners with writing skill insecurities, and examine the synergies that could be created in the acquisition of these two literacies. We look into the heuristic value of the participative web in writing-reading skills, regardless of the learner's level of education, and we discuss the benefits of a learner-centered approach.

Made available in DSpace on 2016-06-02T20:25:15Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 4637.pdf: 22017571 bytes, checksum: a652ecfe06e6492ad848650a6e6795d9 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2012-02-24 / Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais / In this work, we intend to investigate the guidance forms to other s discourse considering the news genre of discourse in the field of brazilian mainstream press. The introduction of the paradigm of objectivity, inserted in the 1950 years, was very important in the history of this sphere of activity. This paradigm has represented major structural changes in the composition of the news text and especially about the reported speech which, since then, it has become a privileged material to be articulated with the pretense of exempting journalistic discourse of any assessment about the fact reported. In the Brazilian press, the introduction of the paradigm of objectivity took place under some historical, economic and political context which required of the mainstream press self-assertion. In addition, the introduction of this paradigm also has occurred in a time when the technological conditions allow the reproduction of the photograph on a large scale. Thus the photographic image, supported by scientificist conceptions of mechanical objectivity, was added as a significant element to support values espoused under the paradigm of objectivity, also conditioning the practices of production and consumption of news. Based on these consideration, we intended to investigate the relationship established with the reported discourse, formed by the semiotic interaction of verbal and photography signs in the news genre of discourse. To accomplish this work, we sought support mainly in the bakhtinian Philosophy of Language, and specific theoretical and historic works about press and photojournalism. In addition, as support for our understandings, it was also considered some studies that deal specifically with photographic image. In order to operate our study, we selected a set of texts of editorship Cotidiano of the Folha de S. Paulo newspaper. In the analysis it was observed a peculiar trend for the use of syntactic forms of indirect speech and direct speech which correspond to the ideological refraction from the paradigm of objectivity. We also understand distinct forms of positioning of the photographic image in relationship with the some else discourse, which may emphasize or reduce the assessments of this kind of discourse, change its truth value, strengthen it or weaken it in the social hierarchy of values, justify or condemn it morally, scientifically and pragmatically, etc. / Nesta dissertação procuramos investigar as formas de orientação para o discurso alheio no gênero do discurso notícia da grande imprensa brasileira. Na história desse campo de atividade, muito relevante foi a introdução do paradigma da objetividade que se instalou a partir dos anos de 1950. Esse paradigma representou importantes mudanças estruturais na composição do texto noticioso e, sobretudo, em relação ao discurso alheio que, desde então, tornou-se material privilegiado a ser articulado com a pretensão de isentar o discurso jornalístico de qualquer avaliação sobre o fato noticiado. Na imprensa brasileira, a introdução do paradigma da objetividade se deu sob determinadas particularidades históricas, políticas e econômicas que demandavam um processo de autoafirmação da grande imprensa. Além disso, a introdução desse paradigma também se deu num período em que as condições tecnológicas permitiam a reprodução da fotografia em grande escala. Assim, a imagem fotográfica, já amparada em concepções cientificistas de objetividade mecânica, entrou como elemento de peso para sustentar os valores defendidos sob a determinação do paradigma da objetividade e, inclusive, condicionando práticas de produção e consumo da notícia. Partindo dessas considerações, procuramos investigar a relação estabelecida com o discurso alheio constituída na interação semiótica do signo verbal e do fotográfico no gênero do discurso notícia. Para realizar nosso trabalho buscamos apoio principalmente na Filosofia da Linguagem bakhtiniana e em trabalhos específicos de teoria e história da imprensa e do fotojornalismo; além disso, para auxiliar nossas compreensões, buscamos apoio em alguns trabalhos que tratam especificamente da imagem fotográfica. Para operar nossa investigação selecionamos um conjunto de textos noticiosos do caderno Cotidiano do jornal Folha de S. Paulo. Em nossas análises pudemos perceber tendências de uso das formas sintáticas do discurso indireto e do discurso direto que correspondem à refração ideológica do paradigma da objetividade. Também pudemos compreender formas distintas de orientação da imagem fotográfica para o discurso alheio que podem enfatizar ou atenuar as avaliações desse discurso, modificar o seu valor de verdade, fortalecê-lo ou enfraquecê-lo na hierarquia social dos valores, justificá-lo ou condená-lo moralmente, cientificamente, pragmaticamente, etc.

Fondée sur un corpus de 436 textes de recensions germanophones publiées dans cinq supports de presse généraliste lors du premier semestre 2012, cette étude porte sur le discours de la critique littéraire germanophone. Pour tenter d’identifier des traits constitutifs de la recension, trois axes de recherche sont envisagés : les perspectives textuelle, discursive et métatextuelle. Traditionnellement conçue à partir de la fonction, la notion de texte est considérée ici sous l’angle de la forme. En recourant aux notions de séquences et de périodes, élaborées dans le cadre de la linguistique textuelle, cette étude identifie un réservoir de formes à l’origine de la composition et de la configuration des recensions. Par ailleurs, la perspective discursive permet d’appréhender le sujet énonciateur des recensions comme un lieu de transition de la parole et du savoir. Le critique littéraire s’octroie, en effet, une position institutionnelle qui marque son rapport au savoir afin d’exercer une influence optimale sur le lecteur. L’enjeu est de repérer les marqueurs discursifs qui fondent cette visée argumentative. Enfin, la perspective métatextuelle oblige à concevoir la recension dans son rapport au texte source. Véritable dialogue avec l’œuvre critiquée, la critique exploite explicitement des stratégies empruntées aux discours littéraire et journalistique. Des procédés de reprise textuelle tels que la reformulation, la citation, l’allusion ou la contamination menacent de saper le métatexte pour en faire un hypertexte. Ces trois axes permettent d’aborder la recension en tant que genre, à l’interface entre texte et discours. Les résultats confirment l’idée que le genre doit être abordé non pas dans une perspective statique, comme une liste d’invariants, mais dans une perspective dynamique, comme le résultat de l’interférence de plusieurs genres discursifs. Enfin, c’est une meilleure compréhension de la production et de la réception des recensions qui est en jeu. / Based on a corpus of 436 texts of German book reviews published in five newspapers of non-specialized press during the first half of the year 2012, this study investigates the discourse of German literary criticism. To try and identify constituent characteristics of the review, three areas of research are envisaged: the textual, discursive and metatexual perspectives. Traditionally conceived with regards to function, the notion of text is considered here in terms of shape. By considering the notions of sequences and periods, developed within the text linguistics, this study identifies a reservoir of forms which underpin the composition and the configuration of the reviews. Besides, the discursive perspective allows us to get a sense the speaking subject of the reviews as a transition for speech and knowledge. The literary critic actually benefits from putting himself in an institutional position that marks his/her relation to knowledge in order to have the best influence on the reader. The challenge is to identify possible linguistic markers which serve this argumentative approach. Finally, the metatextual perspective obliges us to conceive the review in its relationship with the source text. The book review is a real dialogue with the criticized book, the criticism explicitly exploits strategies borrowed from the literary and journalistic speeches. Textual processes of repetition such as reformulation, quotation, allusion or contamination threat to undermine the metatext into a hypertext. These three axes allow to approach the review as a genre, in the interface between text and discourse. The results confirm the idea that the genre must be approached not in a static way, as a list of invariants, but in a dynamic way, as the product of the interference of several discursive genres. Finally, what is at stake is a better understanding of the production and of the reception of the reviews.

<p>Дискурс анализа је интердисциплинарно подручје истраживања које<br />посматра језик као делатност. Она се бави питањима разговора и текста и то тако<br />што је фокус пажње подједнако и на саговорницима, и на контексту, и на<br />вербалној поруци.<br />Њу у домаћу академску заједницу уводи Свенка Савић, најпре у оквиру<br />наставе на основним студијама Одсека за српски језик и лингвистику<br />Филозофског факултета у Новом Саду. За овај предмет на Универзитету у Новом<br />Саду објављује уџбеник под називом Дискурс анализа (1993) и формира, заједно<br />са бројним сарадницама, пројекат &bdquo;Новосадски корпус разговорног српског<br />језика&rdquo;. Осим на Одсеку за српски језик и лингвистику, данас се анализа<br />дискурса као наставни предмет изучава и на Одсеку за журналистику и<br />делимично на Одсеку за англистику.<br />Крајем 20. и почетком 21. века у анализи говорних и писаних облика<br />дискурса јавља се нов приступ проучавања под називом критичка анализа<br />дискурса (КАД). У оквиру критичке анализе дискурса, истраживачи се највише<br />баве приказом демонстрације моћи, контроле и друштвених неједнакости у<br />различитим институцијама, а једну такву институцију представља и суд.<br />Примену у истраживању дискурсних особина разговора у суду значајније<br />видимо у радовима са енглеског говорног подручја, док су друга језичка<br />подручја мање истражена. Предмет проучавања ових радова су различите<br />граматичке и дискурсне какрактеристике разговора у суду, као што су: употреба<br />номинализација, пасива и техничких термина током размена у судском поступку<br />(Gibbons, 1999), доминантан положај судије/пороте у простору суднице као и<br />демонстрацију моћи првенством права говорења током судског поступка<br />(Přidalov&aacute;, 1999), анализа типова питања током судског поступка и њихова улога<br />у усмеравању исказа учесника (Cotterill, 2003).<br />У литератури на српском језику радови који се баве правном и судском<br />проблематиком у фокусу пажње углавном имају текст &ndash; писани облик судског<br />дискурса, који се манифестује кроз законе и разне прописе у којима се закон примењује (Јанићијевић, 2010) или се баве одликама жанра текста судских</p><p>пресуда (Макевић, 2014), а мали је број радова који се баве особинама разговора<br />у суду током судског поступка (Јанковић, 2002).<br />Предмет овог рада јесу особине дискурса разговора у суду (ДРС). Термин<br />дискурс разговора у суду подразумева онај тип разговора у којем се један<br />(раз)говорни догађај остварује просторно у јавној сфери (у судници), у којој<br />учествује више особа са одређеним социјалним и дискурсним улогама. У центру<br />пажње су дискурсне стратегије током размена судије са другим учесницима у<br />судском поступку током судске расправе, са посебним освртом на интеракцију<br />између судије и (оп)туженог.<br />Циљ овог истраживања је да се анализира, опише и објасни дискурс судске<br />праксе у институцији суда у Србији и покажу односи друштвене моћи<br />саговорника укључених у судску расправу.<br />Хипотеза је да ће анализа разговора судије са (оп)туженим бити добар<br />показатељ начина на који се у суду спроводе у праксу законодавне одредбе<br />(о дискриминацији, равноправности и сл.) и како се интерпретира друштвена<br />моћ.<br />Теоријско-методолошки оквир коришћен у овом раду је у сагласности са<br />анализом употребе језика, са језичком делатности, пре свега са учењем<br />холандског лингвисте Тојнa ван Дајка (Van Dijk, 2009) о моћи, и у сагласности с<br />теоријом учтивости Пенелопи Браун и Стивена Левинсона (Brown and Levinson,<br />1987). Обе теорије прати дескриптивни приказ одабраних узорака емпиријског<br />материјала.<br />У раду користим метод прикупљања и анализе материјала устаљен у<br />анализи дискурса (Савић, 1993). Емпиријски материјал представља узорак од 9<br />судских расправа из два временска периода: 4 судске расправе снимљене 1991.<br />године и 5 судских расправа снимљених након 24 године (2015). Укупно је<br />снимљено 180,13 минута разговора, односно 140 страна текста трансркибованог<br />у писану форму припремљену за анализу. Јединице анализе су речи, размене и<br />параграфи (Савић, 1993: 57&ndash;61).<br />Резултати истраживања показују да је у разговору у суду доминантна улога<br />суткиње, која има институционално дату моћ да води судску расправу и доноси<br />решења и пресуде. Из доминантне позиције произлази и њена комуникативна и<br />друштвена моћ коју остварује применом различитих разговорних стратегија као<br />што су: стратегија постављања питања, усмеравања разговора, одређивања<br />понашања других у разговору, започињања и завршавања разговора, употреба<br />професионалне терминологије, стратегија ословљавања, извођења закључка,<br />причања прича, прекидања и преклапања разговора са саговорницима.<br />За разлику од суткиње, (оп)тужени је правни лаик са малим дискурсним<br />учинком. Његова подређена улога огледа се у стратегијама: одговарања на<br />питања, покушају усмеравања разговора, покушају постављања питања,<br />принципу сарадње, ословљавању, понављању и самопонављању, прекидању и<br />преклапању, причању приче и оклевању.<br />На основу резултата анализе судских расправа може се закључити да је<br />дискурс разговора у суду хибридни жанр. У њему се на граматичком, лексичком,<br />семантичком и прагматичком нивоу сједињавају формални писани правни<br />дискурс и неформални разговорни језик свакодневне комуникације.<br />Предлог за непосредну праксу. Потребно је успоставити успешнији модел<br />комуникације у суду током интеракција између правних стручњака (судија, јавних тужилаца, адвоката) и правних лаика: избегавањем непознате</p><p>терминoлогије, употребом једноставних реченица (избегавањем пасивне и<br />безличне конструкције и номинализације), коришћењем учтивих фраза и родно<br />осетљивог језика, како би се језик у службеној употреби у институцији суда</p><p>саобразио говору саговорника који нису део судске хијерархије.&nbsp;</p> / <p>Diskurs analiza je interdisciplinarno područje istraživanja koje<br />posmatra jezik kao delatnost. Ona se bavi pitanjima razgovora i teksta i to tako<br />što je fokus pažnje podjednako i na sagovornicima, i na kontekstu, i na<br />verbalnoj poruci.<br />NJu u domaću akademsku zajednicu uvodi Svenka Savić, najpre u okviru<br />nastave na osnovnim studijama Odseka za srpski jezik i lingvistiku<br />Filozofskog fakulteta u Novom Sadu. Za ovaj predmet na Univerzitetu u Novom<br />Sadu objavljuje udžbenik pod nazivom Diskurs analiza (1993) i formira, zajedno<br />sa brojnim saradnicama, projekat &bdquo;Novosadski korpus razgovornog srpskog<br />jezika&rdquo;. Osim na Odseku za srpski jezik i lingvistiku, danas se analiza<br />diskursa kao nastavni predmet izučava i na Odseku za žurnalistiku i<br />delimično na Odseku za anglistiku.<br />Krajem 20. i početkom 21. veka u analizi govornih i pisanih oblika<br />diskursa javlja se nov pristup proučavanja pod nazivom kritička analiza<br />diskursa (KAD). U okviru kritičke analize diskursa, istraživači se najviše<br />bave prikazom demonstracije moći, kontrole i društvenih nejednakosti u<br />različitim institucijama, a jednu takvu instituciju predstavlja i sud.<br />Primenu u istraživanju diskursnih osobina razgovora u sudu značajnije<br />vidimo u radovima sa engleskog govornog područja, dok su druga jezička<br />područja manje istražena. Predmet proučavanja ovih radova su različite<br />gramatičke i diskursne kakrakteristike razgovora u sudu, kao što su: upotreba<br />nominalizacija, pasiva i tehničkih termina tokom razmena u sudskom postupku<br />(Gibbons, 1999), dominantan položaj sudije/porote u prostoru sudnice kao i<br />demonstraciju moći prvenstvom prava govorenja tokom sudskog postupka<br />(Přidalov&aacute;, 1999), analiza tipova pitanja tokom sudskog postupka i njihova uloga<br />u usmeravanju iskaza učesnika (Cotterill, 2003).<br />U literaturi na srpskom jeziku radovi koji se bave pravnom i sudskom<br />problematikom u fokusu pažnje uglavnom imaju tekst &ndash; pisani oblik sudskog<br />diskursa, koji se manifestuje kroz zakone i razne propise u kojima se zakon primenjuje (Janićijević, 2010) ili se bave odlikama žanra teksta sudskih</p><p>presuda (Makević, 2014), a mali je broj radova koji se bave osobinama razgovora<br />u sudu tokom sudskog postupka (Janković, 2002).<br />Predmet ovog rada jesu osobine diskursa razgovora u sudu (DRS). Termin<br />diskurs razgovora u sudu podrazumeva onaj tip razgovora u kojem se jedan<br />(raz)govorni događaj ostvaruje prostorno u javnoj sferi (u sudnici), u kojoj<br />učestvuje više osoba sa određenim socijalnim i diskursnim ulogama. U centru<br />pažnje su diskursne strategije tokom razmena sudije sa drugim učesnicima u<br />sudskom postupku tokom sudske rasprave, sa posebnim osvrtom na interakciju<br />između sudije i (op)tuženog.<br />Cilj ovog istraživanja je da se analizira, opiše i objasni diskurs sudske<br />prakse u instituciji suda u Srbiji i pokažu odnosi društvene moći<br />sagovornika uključenih u sudsku raspravu.<br />Hipoteza je da će analiza razgovora sudije sa (op)tuženim biti dobar<br />pokazatelj načina na koji se u sudu sprovode u praksu zakonodavne odredbe<br />(o diskriminaciji, ravnopravnosti i sl.) i kako se interpretira društvena<br />moć.<br />Teorijsko-metodološki okvir korišćen u ovom radu je u saglasnosti sa<br />analizom upotrebe jezika, sa jezičkom delatnosti, pre svega sa učenjem<br />holandskog lingviste Tojna van Dajka (Van Dijk, 2009) o moći, i u saglasnosti s<br />teorijom učtivosti Penelopi Braun i Stivena Levinsona (Brown and Levinson,<br />1987). Obe teorije prati deskriptivni prikaz odabranih uzoraka empirijskog<br />materijala.<br />U radu koristim metod prikupljanja i analize materijala ustaljen u<br />analizi diskursa (Savić, 1993). Empirijski materijal predstavlja uzorak od 9<br />sudskih rasprava iz dva vremenska perioda: 4 sudske rasprave snimljene 1991.<br />godine i 5 sudskih rasprava snimljenih nakon 24 godine (2015). Ukupno je<br />snimljeno 180,13 minuta razgovora, odnosno 140 strana teksta transrkibovanog<br />u pisanu formu pripremljenu za analizu. Jedinice analize su reči, razmene i<br />paragrafi (Savić, 1993: 57&ndash;61).<br />Rezultati istraživanja pokazuju da je u razgovoru u sudu dominantna uloga<br />sutkinje, koja ima institucionalno datu moć da vodi sudsku raspravu i donosi<br />rešenja i presude. Iz dominantne pozicije proizlazi i njena komunikativna i<br />društvena moć koju ostvaruje primenom različitih razgovornih strategija kao<br />što su: strategija postavljanja pitanja, usmeravanja razgovora, određivanja<br />ponašanja drugih u razgovoru, započinjanja i završavanja razgovora, upotreba<br />profesionalne terminologije, strategija oslovljavanja, izvođenja zaključka,<br />pričanja priča, prekidanja i preklapanja razgovora sa sagovornicima.<br />Za razliku od sutkinje, (op)tuženi je pravni laik sa malim diskursnim<br />učinkom. NJegova podređena uloga ogleda se u strategijama: odgovaranja na<br />pitanja, pokušaju usmeravanja razgovora, pokušaju postavljanja pitanja,<br />principu saradnje, oslovljavanju, ponavljanju i samoponavljanju, prekidanju i<br />preklapanju, pričanju priče i oklevanju.<br />Na osnovu rezultata analize sudskih rasprava može se zaključiti da je<br />diskurs razgovora u sudu hibridni žanr. U njemu se na gramatičkom, leksičkom,<br />semantičkom i pragmatičkom nivou sjedinjavaju formalni pisani pravni<br />diskurs i neformalni razgovorni jezik svakodnevne komunikacije.<br />Predlog za neposrednu praksu. Potrebno je uspostaviti uspešniji model<br />komunikacije u sudu tokom interakcija između pravnih stručnjaka (sudija, javnih tužilaca, advokata) i pravnih laika: izbegavanjem nepoznate</p><p>terminologije, upotrebom jednostavnih rečenica (izbegavanjem pasivne i<br />bezlične konstrukcije i nominalizacije), korišćenjem učtivih fraza i rodno<br />osetljivog jezika, kako bi se jezik u službenoj upotrebi u instituciji suda</p><p>saobrazio govoru sagovornika koji nisu deo sudske hijerarhije.&nbsp;</p> / <p>Discourse analysis is an interdisciplinary research area which observes language as an activity. It deals with issues of conversation and text focusing its attention evenly on interlocutors, context and verbal message.<br />It was introduced to our academic community by Svenka Savić, firstly as teaching within undergraduate studies at Department of Serbian language and linguistics, at the Faculty of Philosophy in Novi Sad.&nbsp; She published a course book Discourse Analysis (1993) for this subject at the University of Novi Sad and established, with numerous associates, a project &bdquo;The Corpus of Novi Sad conversational Serbian language&rdquo;. Today, apart from Department of Serbian language and linguistics, discourse analysis as a subject is taught at Department of journalism and partly at Department of English language and literature.<br />At the end of the XX and the beginning of the XXI century, a new approach of analysing spoken and written forms of discourse appeared, under the name critical discourse analysis (CDA). Within CDA, the researchers mainly deal with the representation of demonstration of power, control and social inequalities in various institutions, one of which is the court.<br />Its application in the study of discourse aspects in courtroom, CDA has particularly found in the works from Anglosphere, while other language spheres have not been researched enough. The subject matter of these works are different grammatical and discourse features of talk in the courtroom such as the use of nominalization, passive construction and technical terms during judical proceedings (Gibbons, 1999), dominant position of a judge/jury in the courtroom as well as&nbsp; demonstration of power by priority turn-taking during judical proceedings (Přidalov&aacute;, 1999), analysis of types of questions during judical proceedings and their role in guiding the participants&rsquo; statements (Cotterill, 2003).<br />In the literature in Serbian language, the works dealing with legal and judical matters mainly focus on the text- written form of courtroom discourse, which manifests itself through laws and their various regulations (Janićijević, 2010) or deal with the aspects of the genre of the verdict text (Makević, 2014), and very few works deal with the aspects of talk in the courtroom during judical proceedings (Janković, 2002).</p><p>The features of courtroom discourse (CD) are the subject of this work. The term courtroom discourse means the type of talk where one spoken event is realized in spatially public sphere (in a courtroom), where several persons with different social and discourse roles participate. Discourse strategies during interaction of a judge with other participants in judical proceeding during hearing are in the spotlight, with particular reference to the interaction between the judge and the defendant/accused.<br />The aim of this research is to analyse, describe and explain the discourse of case-law in the institution of court in Serbia and to show relations of social power of participants involved in judical proceedings.<br />It is supposed that tha analysis of conversation between the judge and the defendant/accused will be an excellent indicator of the manner in which the court implements legislative provisions (оn discrimination, equality and etc.) and how social power is defined.<br />The theoretical and methodological framework in this study is in compliance with analysis of use of language, with linguistic activity, above all with the approach of Dutch linguist Teun van Dijk (2009) on power, and in accordance with the Politeness theory by Penelope Brown and Stephen Levinson (1987). Both thories are accompanied by descriptive review of selected examples of empirical material.<br />I have used the method of collecting and analysing material rooted in analysis of discourse (Savić, 1993). The empirical material represents nine courtroom hearings from two periods of time: 4 in 1991 and 5 courtroom hearings recorded 24 years later (2015). There are 180.13 minutes of recorded conversation, that is 140 pages of text transcribed into written form prepared for analysis. The units of analysis are words, exchanges and paragraphs (Savić, 1993: 57&ndash;61).<br />The results of the research show that in a courtroom discourse the role of the judge is undoubtedly dominant, having the institutionally given power to lead the hearing and reaches decisions and verdicts. Her communicative as well as social power arises from the domination which she realizes this applying various conversation strategies such as: strategy of posing questions, directing the talk, adjusting behaviour of other interlocutors, starting and ending the talk, use of professional terminology, addresssing strategy, drawing the conclusions, storytelling, interupting and overlapping the interlocutors.<br />Unlike the judge, the defendant/accused is a law layman with small discoursive contribution. Their subordinated role is reflected in the following strategies: question answering, attempting to direct the talk, attempting to pose a question, principle of cooperation, addressing, repeating and self-repeating, interupting and overlapping, storytelling and hesitating.<br />Based on the results of the analysis of the courtroom hearings, we can draw the conclusion that the courtroom discourse is rather hybrid in its genre. It represents, on grammatic, lexic, semantic and pragmatic level, merging of&nbsp; formal written legal discourse and informal spoken language of everday conversation.<br />Suggestion for direct practice. It is essential to establish more successful model of communication in a courtroom during the interaction among law experts (judges, Abstract:</p><p>AB</p><p>Discourse analysis is an interdisciplinary research area which observes language as an activity. It deals with issues of conversation and text focusing its attention evenly on interlocutors, context and verbal message.<br />It was introduced to our academic community by Svenka Savić, firstly as teaching within undergraduate studies at Department of Serbian language and linguistics, at the Faculty of Philosophy in Novi Sad.&nbsp; She published a course book Discourse Analysis (1993) for this subject at the University of Novi Sad and established, with numerous associates, a project &bdquo;The Corpus of Novi Sad conversational Serbian language&rdquo;. Today, apart from Department of Serbian language and linguistics, discourse analysis as a subject is taught at Department of journalism and partly at Department of English language and literature.<br />At the end of the XX and the beginning of the XXI century, a new approach of analysing spoken and written forms of discourse appeared, under the name critical discourse analysis (CDA). Within CDA, the researchers mainly deal with the representation of demonstration of power, control and social inequalities in various institutions, one of which is the court.<br />Its application in the study of discourse aspects in courtroom, CDA has particularly found in the works from Anglosphere, while other language spheres have not been researched enough. The subject matter of these works are different grammatical and discourse features of talk in the courtroom such as the use of nominalization, passive construction and technical terms during judical proceedings (Gibbons, 1999), dominant position of a judge/jury in the courtroom as well as&nbsp; demonstration of power by priority turn-taking during judical proceedings (Přidalov&aacute;, 1999), analysis of types of questions during judical proceedings and their role in guiding the participants&rsquo; statements (Cotterill, 2003).<br />In the literature in Serbian language, the works dealing with legal and judical matters mainly focus on the text- written form of courtroom discourse, which manifests itself through laws and their various regulations (Janićijević, 2010) or deal with the aspects of the genre of the verdict text (Makević, 2014), and very few works deal with the aspects of talk in the courtroom during judical proceedings (Janković, 2002).<br />The features of courtroom discourse (CD) are the subject of this work. The term courtroom discourse means the type of talk where one spoken event is realized in spatially public sphere (in a courtroom), where several persons with different social and discourse roles participate. Discourse strategies during interaction of a judge with other participants in judical proceeding during hearing are in the spotlight, with particular reference to the interaction between the judge and the defendant/accused.<br />The aim of this research is to analyse, describe and explain the discourse of case-law in the institution of court in Serbia and to show relations of social power of participants involved in judical proceedings.<br />It is supposed that tha analysis of conversation between the judge and the defendant/accused will be an excellent indicator of the manner in which the court implements legislative provisions (оn discrimination, equality and etc.) and how social power is defined.<br />The theoretical and methodological framework in this study is in compliance with analysis of use of language, with linguistic activity, above all with the approach of Dutch linguist Teun van Dijk (2009) on power, and in accordance with the Politeness theory by Penelope Brown and Stephen Levinson (1987). Both thories are accompanied by descriptive review of selected examples of empirical material.<br />I have used the method of collecting and analysing material rooted in analysis of discourse (Savić, 1993). The empirical material represents nine courtroom hearings from two periods of time: 4 in 1991 and 5 courtroom hearings recorded 24 years later (2015). There are 180.13 minutes of recorded conversation, that is 140 pages of text transcribed into written form prepared for analysis. The units of analysis are words, exchanges and paragraphs (Savić, 1993: 57&ndash;61).<br />The results of the research show that in a courtroom discourse the role of the judge is undoubtedly dominant, having the institutionally given power to lead the hearing and reaches decisions and verdicts. Her communicative as well as social power arises from the domination which she realizes this applying various conversation strategies such as: strategy of posing questions, directing the talk, adjusting behaviour of other interlocutors, starting and ending the talk, use of professional terminology, addresssing strategy, drawing the conclusions, storytelling, interupting and overlapping the interlocutors.<br />Unlike the judge, the defendant/accused is a law layman with small discoursive contribution. Their subordinated role is reflected in the following strategies: question answering, attempting to direct the talk, attempting to pose a question, principle of cooperation, addressing, repeating and self-repeating, interupting and overlapping, storytelling and hesitating.<br />Based on the results of the analysis of the courtroom hearings, we can draw the conclusion that the courtroom discourse is rather hybrid in its genre. It represents, on grammatic, lexic, semantic and pragmatic level, merging of&nbsp; formal written legal discourse and informal spoken language of everday conversation.<br />Suggestion for direct practice. It is essential to establish more successful model of communication in a courtroom during the interaction among law experts (judges, prosecutors, lawyers) and law laymen: avoiding unfamiliar terms, using simple sentences (avoiding passive and impersonal constructions and nominalizations), using polite and gender-sensitive language, so as to assimilate the use of official institutional language with the speech of interlocutors who are not part of the court hierarchy.</p>