中文民事起诉状的语篇语义分析
摘要
民事起诉状,又叫民事诉状,是指公民、法人或其他组织,因自己的民事权利受到侵害或者与他人发生民事争议时,为维护自己的合法权益,依据事实和法律,按照法定程序,向人民法院提起民事诉讼时制作并使用的法律文书。民事起诉状的目的是使法官相信原告的合法权益受到侵害,受理案件,并通过法律的手段保障公民的合法权益以维护社会公平正义。在司法实践中,一篇成功的民事起诉状对法官在庭审中做出有利判决发挥着十分重要的作用。然而,不论是国内还是国外还很少有人从语篇语义的角度研究民事起诉状的语篇语义资源以及对这些语篇语义选择做出解释。本文将从此方面做尝试性研究。
本文的研究目的在于研究语篇语义资源在中文民事起诉状中是如何分布的,探索形成这些语篇语义选择的原因何在,以及发现民事诉状中体现的原被告之间的不平等关系。此外,从语言学的角度研究民事诉状有利于法律工作者更好的借助语言工具提高中文民事诉状的制作水平。
本文共分为五章。第一章介绍本文的研究合理性、研究目的、研究方法、语料的搜集以及本文的结构。第二章回顾语篇语义理论的发展,回顾国内外法律语言的研究以及民事起诉状的研究。第三章详细介绍了本文的理论框架——马丁和罗斯(2003)的语篇语义理论﹑以及语域和语类对语篇语义选择的作用。第四章从五个语篇系统详细分析中文民事起诉状,研究语篇语义资源在民事诉状中的语篇语义资源选择,并从语体的交际目的和语域变量的角度解释这些选择形成的原因。通过研究发现民事诉状中原被告方的关系并不平等。这主要体现在以下两个不平等关系中,一个是在诉状中原告方拥有更多的话语权,另一个是在民事冲突发生的过程中,原被告实施行为的地位也是不平等的。被告的行为多是主动的攻击性行为,原告的行为多是消极的应对性行为。第五章总结全文,小结本文的研究发现,并指出本文存在的局限性以及进一步研究的建议。
通过分析发现,民事诉状主要通过突显当事人行为,特别是被告方的道德行为来描述民事冲突发生的过程;多种声音来源的介入有助于体现民事诉状的客观性,利用证据佐证原告方的起诉是基于事实和法律的。评价资源和概念资源的分析使民事冲突发生的过程中原被告的关系和相关责任清晰化。民事诉状还运用连接词来增强其内部的逻辑性和连贯性,提高原告论证的可信度。双方当事人在首部被引入后,通过重复他们的诉讼角色来追踪他们的行为,既有利于追踪原被告在民事冲突中相关责任关系,又有利于体现民事诉状的客观严谨性。层级结构与链式结构并用,使民事诉状既具有逻辑层次性,又能使法官清晰地了解双方当事人冲突发生的经过。所有这些资源共同作用促成了一篇成功的民事起诉状的形成。这些语篇语义资源的选择是与民事起诉状的交际目的和三个语域变量分不开的。
通过研究还发现,民事诉状中原告和被告的关系是不平等的。首先表现在在民事诉状中原告方拥有更多的话语权,作为起诉者,原告势必做出更有利于自己的陈述,使被告方处于劣势。另一个不平等表现在在民事冲突发生的过程中原告与被告实施行为的地位也是不平等的。被告的行为多是主动的攻击性行为,原告的行为多是消极的应对性行为。事实上,这两对不平等关系是有联系的。正是由于原告在民事冲突发生的过程中受到了不平等的待遇,他才提起诉讼,利用在民事起诉状中的优势地位弥补在民事冲突中因劣势地位受到的侵害,寻求新的公平和平等。
对中文民事诉状的语篇语义分析,可为司法工作者制作成功有效的民事诉状提供借鉴意义,也可吸引语言研究者对法律语言的研究兴趣,使语言学知识更好地为其他学科服务。
对民事起诉状的研究尚有丰富的空间:笔者将进一步搜集中文民事起诉状,运用定量分析与定性分析相结合的方法对其进行更深入的研究。此外,笔者还将努力收集英美国家的民事诉状,与中文民事诉状进行对比性研究。
Civil complaint is a kind of legal documents with which citizen, artificial person, or other organizations initiate civil proceedings towards the People’s Court because their civil rights and interests suffer from trespass or because there is a civil controversy between the plaintiff and the defendant. Civil complaint ought to be made on the basis of facts and law and be used in accordance with legal procedure. The purpose of civil complaint is to make the judge believe that the plaintiff’s legal rights and interests suffer from trespass and to make favorable decisions in the court trial to maintain fair and square of the society. In judicial practice, a successful civil complaint plays a great role in making the judge make favorable decisions in the court trial. However, the discourse semantic study of civil complaint has seldom been explored both at home and abroad. This thesis is inclined to make a tentative study on civil complaint from discourse semantic perspective.
This thesis tries to study how discourse semantic resources distribute in Chinese civil complaint, to explore the reasons why such discourse semantic choices are made and to discover the unequal relationships between the plaintiff and the defendant realized in civil complaint. Besides, the study on civil complaint from linguistic perspective is favorable to improve the production quality of civil complaint.
This thesis comprises five chapters. Chapter one introduces the rationale, the objectives, the approach of the research, data collection and the organization of the thesis. Chapter two reviews the discourse semantic theory, the study on legal language, and the study on civil complaint at home and abroad. Chapter three introduces the framework of this thesis—Martin and Rose’s (2003) discourse semantic theory in details. And the important roles of genre and register in explaining the discourse semantic choices are also discussed. Chapter four makes analysis of Chinese civil complaint from the five systems to study the semantic choices in civil complaint and makes clear the reasons for such choices. The choices are greatly influenced by the communicative goal of civil complaint and its contextual variables. Through analysis, it is discovered that the plaintiff and the defendant in civil complaint are not in equal relationship. First of all, the plaintiff has more saying power in civil complaint. The other one is that the plaintiff and the defendant are in unequal relationship in the process of the civil conflict. The defendant’s behaviors are always active and aggressive while the plaintiff’s behaviors are usually passive. Chapter five concludes this thesis, summarizes the major findings and points out the limitations and suggestions for further study.
Through analysis, it is discovered that Attitude foregrounds Judgement of the litigants’behaviors, especially the defendant’s moral judgement to describe how the civil conflict happens. Various voices involved are of help to represent the objectivity of civil complaint and to prove the plaintiff’s litigation is on the basis of facts and law. Analysis of the Attitude resources and Ideation resources function to make clear the relationship of the plaintiff and the defendant as well as their relevant responsibilities. Civil complaint always takes advantage of conjunctions to show its logicality and coherence to enhance the credibility of the plaintiff’s arguments. The litigants are tracked via repetition of their litigation roles once they are introduced. Identification resources make civil complaint formal and precise. Identification analysis is in favor of tracking the relationship of the two parties and their relevant responsibilities. And it also makes civil complaint objective and precise. The combination of hierarchical structure and serial expansion strategies not only makes civil complaint logical and hierarchical, but also makes the judge clear about the whole process of the conflict. All these resources work together to make a successful civil complaint. And these semantic choices are greatly influenced by the communicative objective of civil complaint and its register variables.
Through analysis, it is also discovered that the relationship between the plaintiff and the defendant in civil complaint is not equal. First of all, the plaintiff has more say in civil complaint. As the indictor, the plaintiff certainly will make favorable statements and make the defendant in an inferior position. The other one is that the plaintiff and the defendant are in unequal relationship in the process of civil conflict. The defendant’s behaviors are always active and aggressive while the plaintiff’s behaviors are usually passive. Actually, the two unequal relationships are related. The reason why the plaintiff initiates litigation is that he suffers from unequal treatment in the process of a conflict. Thus the plaintiff takes advantage of his advantageous position in civil complaint to recuperate his losses and to strive for a new impartiality and equality.
Analysis of Chinese civil complaint may be of help for the lawyers to make successful and effective civil complaints. Such analysis may attract language learners’interests towards legal language so as to make linguistic study be helpful for other subjects.
There are rich opportunities for the further study of civil complaint. The author will collect Chinese civil complaint as much as possible to make further study via the combination of quantitative approach and qualitative approach. And the author will try to collect Anglo-American civil complaint to make contrast study.
本文的研究目的在于研究语篇语义资源在中文民事起诉状中是如何分布的,探索形成这些语篇语义选择的原因何在,以及发现民事诉状中体现的原被告之间的不平等关系。此外,从语言学的角度研究民事诉状有利于法律工作者更好的借助语言工具提高中文民事诉状的制作水平。
本文共分为五章。第一章介绍本文的研究合理性、研究目的、研究方法、语料的搜集以及本文的结构。第二章回顾语篇语义理论的发展,回顾国内外法律语言的研究以及民事起诉状的研究。第三章详细介绍了本文的理论框架——马丁和罗斯(2003)的语篇语义理论﹑以及语域和语类对语篇语义选择的作用。第四章从五个语篇系统详细分析中文民事起诉状,研究语篇语义资源在民事诉状中的语篇语义资源选择,并从语体的交际目的和语域变量的角度解释这些选择形成的原因。通过研究发现民事诉状中原被告方的关系并不平等。这主要体现在以下两个不平等关系中,一个是在诉状中原告方拥有更多的话语权,另一个是在民事冲突发生的过程中,原被告实施行为的地位也是不平等的。被告的行为多是主动的攻击性行为,原告的行为多是消极的应对性行为。第五章总结全文,小结本文的研究发现,并指出本文存在的局限性以及进一步研究的建议。
通过分析发现,民事诉状主要通过突显当事人行为,特别是被告方的道德行为来描述民事冲突发生的过程;多种声音来源的介入有助于体现民事诉状的客观性,利用证据佐证原告方的起诉是基于事实和法律的。评价资源和概念资源的分析使民事冲突发生的过程中原被告的关系和相关责任清晰化。民事诉状还运用连接词来增强其内部的逻辑性和连贯性,提高原告论证的可信度。双方当事人在首部被引入后,通过重复他们的诉讼角色来追踪他们的行为,既有利于追踪原被告在民事冲突中相关责任关系,又有利于体现民事诉状的客观严谨性。层级结构与链式结构并用,使民事诉状既具有逻辑层次性,又能使法官清晰地了解双方当事人冲突发生的经过。所有这些资源共同作用促成了一篇成功的民事起诉状的形成。这些语篇语义资源的选择是与民事起诉状的交际目的和三个语域变量分不开的。
通过研究还发现,民事诉状中原告和被告的关系是不平等的。首先表现在在民事诉状中原告方拥有更多的话语权,作为起诉者,原告势必做出更有利于自己的陈述,使被告方处于劣势。另一个不平等表现在在民事冲突发生的过程中原告与被告实施行为的地位也是不平等的。被告的行为多是主动的攻击性行为,原告的行为多是消极的应对性行为。事实上,这两对不平等关系是有联系的。正是由于原告在民事冲突发生的过程中受到了不平等的待遇,他才提起诉讼,利用在民事起诉状中的优势地位弥补在民事冲突中因劣势地位受到的侵害,寻求新的公平和平等。
对中文民事诉状的语篇语义分析,可为司法工作者制作成功有效的民事诉状提供借鉴意义,也可吸引语言研究者对法律语言的研究兴趣,使语言学知识更好地为其他学科服务。
对民事起诉状的研究尚有丰富的空间:笔者将进一步搜集中文民事起诉状,运用定量分析与定性分析相结合的方法对其进行更深入的研究。此外,笔者还将努力收集英美国家的民事诉状,与中文民事诉状进行对比性研究。
Civil complaint is a kind of legal documents with which citizen, artificial person, or other organizations initiate civil proceedings towards the People’s Court because their civil rights and interests suffer from trespass or because there is a civil controversy between the plaintiff and the defendant. Civil complaint ought to be made on the basis of facts and law and be used in accordance with legal procedure. The purpose of civil complaint is to make the judge believe that the plaintiff’s legal rights and interests suffer from trespass and to make favorable decisions in the court trial to maintain fair and square of the society. In judicial practice, a successful civil complaint plays a great role in making the judge make favorable decisions in the court trial. However, the discourse semantic study of civil complaint has seldom been explored both at home and abroad. This thesis is inclined to make a tentative study on civil complaint from discourse semantic perspective.
This thesis tries to study how discourse semantic resources distribute in Chinese civil complaint, to explore the reasons why such discourse semantic choices are made and to discover the unequal relationships between the plaintiff and the defendant realized in civil complaint. Besides, the study on civil complaint from linguistic perspective is favorable to improve the production quality of civil complaint.
This thesis comprises five chapters. Chapter one introduces the rationale, the objectives, the approach of the research, data collection and the organization of the thesis. Chapter two reviews the discourse semantic theory, the study on legal language, and the study on civil complaint at home and abroad. Chapter three introduces the framework of this thesis—Martin and Rose’s (2003) discourse semantic theory in details. And the important roles of genre and register in explaining the discourse semantic choices are also discussed. Chapter four makes analysis of Chinese civil complaint from the five systems to study the semantic choices in civil complaint and makes clear the reasons for such choices. The choices are greatly influenced by the communicative goal of civil complaint and its contextual variables. Through analysis, it is discovered that the plaintiff and the defendant in civil complaint are not in equal relationship. First of all, the plaintiff has more saying power in civil complaint. The other one is that the plaintiff and the defendant are in unequal relationship in the process of the civil conflict. The defendant’s behaviors are always active and aggressive while the plaintiff’s behaviors are usually passive. Chapter five concludes this thesis, summarizes the major findings and points out the limitations and suggestions for further study.
Through analysis, it is discovered that Attitude foregrounds Judgement of the litigants’behaviors, especially the defendant’s moral judgement to describe how the civil conflict happens. Various voices involved are of help to represent the objectivity of civil complaint and to prove the plaintiff’s litigation is on the basis of facts and law. Analysis of the Attitude resources and Ideation resources function to make clear the relationship of the plaintiff and the defendant as well as their relevant responsibilities. Civil complaint always takes advantage of conjunctions to show its logicality and coherence to enhance the credibility of the plaintiff’s arguments. The litigants are tracked via repetition of their litigation roles once they are introduced. Identification resources make civil complaint formal and precise. Identification analysis is in favor of tracking the relationship of the two parties and their relevant responsibilities. And it also makes civil complaint objective and precise. The combination of hierarchical structure and serial expansion strategies not only makes civil complaint logical and hierarchical, but also makes the judge clear about the whole process of the conflict. All these resources work together to make a successful civil complaint. And these semantic choices are greatly influenced by the communicative objective of civil complaint and its register variables.
Through analysis, it is also discovered that the relationship between the plaintiff and the defendant in civil complaint is not equal. First of all, the plaintiff has more say in civil complaint. As the indictor, the plaintiff certainly will make favorable statements and make the defendant in an inferior position. The other one is that the plaintiff and the defendant are in unequal relationship in the process of civil conflict. The defendant’s behaviors are always active and aggressive while the plaintiff’s behaviors are usually passive. Actually, the two unequal relationships are related. The reason why the plaintiff initiates litigation is that he suffers from unequal treatment in the process of a conflict. Thus the plaintiff takes advantage of his advantageous position in civil complaint to recuperate his losses and to strive for a new impartiality and equality.
Analysis of Chinese civil complaint may be of help for the lawyers to make successful and effective civil complaints. Such analysis may attract language learners’interests towards legal language so as to make linguistic study be helpful for other subjects.
There are rich opportunities for the further study of civil complaint. The author will collect Chinese civil complaint as much as possible to make further study via the combination of quantitative approach and qualitative approach. And the author will try to collect Anglo-American civil complaint to make contrast study.
引文
Charrow, R. P. and Charrow, V. Making Legal Language Understandable: A Psycholinguistic Study of Jury Instruction [J]. Columbia Law Review, 1979, (79): 1306-1374
Conley, J. M. and W. M. O’Barr. Just Words: Law, Language and Power [M]. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1998
Crystal, David and D. Daly. Investigating English Style [M]. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. 1969
Danet, B. Legal Discourse [M]. In T. van Dijk, ed., Handbook of Discourse Analysis Vol. 2. London: Academic Press Inc. Ltd. 1985
Drew, Paul. Strategies of Contest between Lawyer and Witness in Cross Examination [J]. In Judith N. Levi and Anne G. Walker, eds. 1990: 39-64
Eades, Diana. A Case of Communicative Clash: Aboriginal English and the Legal System [J]. In J. Gibbons ed., Language and Law. Harlow: Longman. 1994: 234-264
Eagleson, Robert. Forensic Analysis of Personal Written Texts: A Case Study [J]. In J. Gibbons ed., Language and Law. Harlow: Longman. 1994: 363-373
Firth, J. R. Papers in Linguistics, 1934-1951 [M]. London: Oxford University Press, 1957: 190
Gibbons, John. Language and the Law [M]. London: Longman Group UK Limited, 1994
Gibbons, John. Forensic Linguistics: An Introduction to Language in Justice System [M]. Malden, Mass: Blackwell Publishers, 2003
Gutwinski, W. Cohesion in Literary Texts: A Study of Some Grammatical and Lexical Features of English Discourse [M]. The Hague: Mouton. 1976: 36-63
Halliday, M. A. K. and R. Hasan. Cohesion in English [M]. London: Longman Group UK Limited, 1976. /北京:外语教学与研究出版社,2001
Halliday, M. A. K. Language as Social Semiotic: The Social Interpretation of Languageand Meaning [M]. London: Edward Arnold (publishers) Limited, 1978 /北京:外语教学与研究出版社,2001
Halliday, M. A. K. An Introduction to Functional Grammar (2nd edition) [M]. London: Edward Arnold (Publishers) Limited, 1994 /北京:外语教学与研究出版社,2000
Jones, A. The Limitations of Voice Identification [J]. In J. Gibbons ed., Language and Law. Harlow: Longman. 1994: 363-373
Labov, William and Wendell A. Harris. Addressing Social Issues through Linguistic Evidence [J]. In J. Gibbons ed., Language and Law. Harlow: Longman. 1994: 265-3o5
Lakoff, R. Language and Women’s Place [M]. New York: Harper. 1975
Levi, Judith N. and Anne Graffam Walker. Language in the Judicial Process [C]. New York: Plenum Press. 1990
Martin, J. R. English Text: System and Structure [M]. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 1992 /北京:北京大学出版社,2004
Martin, J. R.‘Beyond Exchange: APPRAISAL System in English’. In S. Hunston and G. Thompson (ed.) Evaluation in Text: Authorial Stance and the Construction of Discourse. pp. 142-175. Oxford: CUP, 2000
Martin, J. R. and David Rose. Working with Discourse: Meaning beyond the Clause [M]. London and New York: Continuum, 2003. /北京:北京大学出版社,2007
Martin, J. R. and P. White. The Language of Evaluation: Appraisal in English [M]. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2005
Mellinkoff, David. The Language of the Law [M]. Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1963
Matoesian, Gregory M. Reproducing Rape: Domination through Talk in the Courtroom [M]. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 1993
O’Barr, William. Linguistic Evidence: Language, Power and Strategy in the Courtroom [M]. New York: Academic Press. 1982
Richards, Jack R, J. Platt and H. Platt. Longman Dictionary of Language Teaching andApplied Linguistics [M]. London: Longman Group UK Limited, 1992. /管燕红译,北京:外语教学与研究出版社,2000
Rieber, Robert W. and William A. Steward. The Language Scientist as Expert in the Legal Setting: Issues in Forensic Linguistics [M]. New York: The New York Academy of Science. 1990
Solan, Lawrence M. The Language of Judges [M]. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 1993
Shuy, Roger W. The Language of Confession, Interrogation and Deception [M]. Thousand Oaks CA: Sage. 1987
Tiersma, Peter M. Legal Language [M]. Chicago: the University of Chicago Press, 1999
Walsh, Michael. Interactional Styles in the Courtroom [J]. In J. Gibbons ed., Language and Law. Harlow: Longman. 1994: 217-233
White, P. R.‘An introductory tour through appraisal theory’. http:// www. Grammatics. com / appraisal / Appraisal Outline / UnFramed / Appraisal Outline. htm. 1999
陈令君.英语学术书评的评价:一项基于语料库的研究[D].山东:山东大学,2008
戴凡.格律论和评价系统在语篇中的文体意义[J].中山大学学报,2002,42(5):41-48
杜金榜.法律语言学[M].上海:上海外语教育出版社,2004
胡壮麟.语篇衔接与连贯[M].上海:上海外语教育出版社,1994
胡壮麟.语言学教程[M].北京:外语教学与研究出版社,2001:158
胡壮麟,朱永生,张德禄,李战子.系统功能语言学导论[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2008
黄国文.语篇分析概要[M].长沙:湖南教育出版社,1988
姜望琪.语篇语义学与评价系统[J].外语教学,2009,30(2):1-5
姜望琪.Firth的语篇语义学思想[J].外国语言文学,2008,24(4):1-8
姜望琪.Martin的语篇语义学思想[J].北京科技大学学报,2008,(1):95-104
J.R.马丁,王振华.实现化、实例化和个性化-系统功能语言学的三种层次关系[J].上海交通大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2008,16(5):73-81
李发根.评价的识别、功能和参数[J].外语与外语教学,2006,(11):1-3
李振宇.法律语言学新说[M].北京:中国检查出版社,2006
廖美珍.国外法律语言学研究综述[J].当代语言学,2004,6(1):66-76
廖美珍.法庭语言技巧[J].北京:法律出版社,2005
刘立华,刘世生.语篇建构的互动视角[J].国外外语教学,2006,(3):1-5
马伟林.人际功能的拓展-评价系统述评[J].语言学研究,2007,(6):142-146
宁致远.新编中国法律文书范本-写法、格式与范例[M].北京:知识产权出版社,2005
潘庆云.中国法律语言鉴衡[M].上海:汉语大词典出版社,2004
宋北平.法律语言研究三十年回顾与展望[J].北京政法职业学院学报,2008,(4):31-35
田华静.中国刑事辩护词的语篇语义分析[D].开封:河南大学,2007
王健.沟通两个世界的法律意义—晚清西方法的输入与法律新词初探[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,2001
王洁.法律语言研究[M].广州:广东教育出版社,1997
王振华.评价系统及其运作-系统功能语言学的新发展[J].外国语,2001,(6):13-20.
王振华.马丁论语篇格律[A].见黄国文,杨炳钧.《语篇·功能·教学》[M].广州:中山大学出版社,2002:178-186
王振华.“物质过程”的评价价值-以分析小说人物形象为例[J].外国语,2004,(5):41-47
王振华.介入:言语活动的一种评价视角[D].开封:河南大学,2004
闻兴媛.民事诉状叙事结构的主位研究[J].中山大学学报论丛,2007,27(4):190-195
杨敏.法律语篇权力意志研究[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,2007
余志纯.法律语言学[M].西安:陕西人民教育出版社,2007
余叔通,文嘉.新汉英法学词典[M].北京:法律出版社,1998
张德禄,刘世铸.形式与意义的范畴化-兼评《评价语言―英语的评价系统》[J].外语教学与研究,2006,38(6):423-427
张昕.从评价理论角度分析英语学术书评[D].成都:西南交通大学,2006
赵景林.民用法律文书大全(第四版) [M].北京:群众出版社,2003
Conley, J. M. and W. M. O’Barr. Just Words: Law, Language and Power [M]. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1998
Crystal, David and D. Daly. Investigating English Style [M]. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. 1969
Danet, B. Legal Discourse [M]. In T. van Dijk, ed., Handbook of Discourse Analysis Vol. 2. London: Academic Press Inc. Ltd. 1985
Drew, Paul. Strategies of Contest between Lawyer and Witness in Cross Examination [J]. In Judith N. Levi and Anne G. Walker, eds. 1990: 39-64
Eades, Diana. A Case of Communicative Clash: Aboriginal English and the Legal System [J]. In J. Gibbons ed., Language and Law. Harlow: Longman. 1994: 234-264
Eagleson, Robert. Forensic Analysis of Personal Written Texts: A Case Study [J]. In J. Gibbons ed., Language and Law. Harlow: Longman. 1994: 363-373
Firth, J. R. Papers in Linguistics, 1934-1951 [M]. London: Oxford University Press, 1957: 190
Gibbons, John. Language and the Law [M]. London: Longman Group UK Limited, 1994
Gibbons, John. Forensic Linguistics: An Introduction to Language in Justice System [M]. Malden, Mass: Blackwell Publishers, 2003
Gutwinski, W. Cohesion in Literary Texts: A Study of Some Grammatical and Lexical Features of English Discourse [M]. The Hague: Mouton. 1976: 36-63
Halliday, M. A. K. and R. Hasan. Cohesion in English [M]. London: Longman Group UK Limited, 1976. /北京:外语教学与研究出版社,2001
Halliday, M. A. K. Language as Social Semiotic: The Social Interpretation of Languageand Meaning [M]. London: Edward Arnold (publishers) Limited, 1978 /北京:外语教学与研究出版社,2001
Halliday, M. A. K. An Introduction to Functional Grammar (2nd edition) [M]. London: Edward Arnold (Publishers) Limited, 1994 /北京:外语教学与研究出版社,2000
Jones, A. The Limitations of Voice Identification [J]. In J. Gibbons ed., Language and Law. Harlow: Longman. 1994: 363-373
Labov, William and Wendell A. Harris. Addressing Social Issues through Linguistic Evidence [J]. In J. Gibbons ed., Language and Law. Harlow: Longman. 1994: 265-3o5
Lakoff, R. Language and Women’s Place [M]. New York: Harper. 1975
Levi, Judith N. and Anne Graffam Walker. Language in the Judicial Process [C]. New York: Plenum Press. 1990
Martin, J. R. English Text: System and Structure [M]. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 1992 /北京:北京大学出版社,2004
Martin, J. R.‘Beyond Exchange: APPRAISAL System in English’. In S. Hunston and G. Thompson (ed.) Evaluation in Text: Authorial Stance and the Construction of Discourse. pp. 142-175. Oxford: CUP, 2000
Martin, J. R. and David Rose. Working with Discourse: Meaning beyond the Clause [M]. London and New York: Continuum, 2003. /北京:北京大学出版社,2007
Martin, J. R. and P. White. The Language of Evaluation: Appraisal in English [M]. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2005
Mellinkoff, David. The Language of the Law [M]. Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1963
Matoesian, Gregory M. Reproducing Rape: Domination through Talk in the Courtroom [M]. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 1993
O’Barr, William. Linguistic Evidence: Language, Power and Strategy in the Courtroom [M]. New York: Academic Press. 1982
Richards, Jack R, J. Platt and H. Platt. Longman Dictionary of Language Teaching andApplied Linguistics [M]. London: Longman Group UK Limited, 1992. /管燕红译,北京:外语教学与研究出版社,2000
Rieber, Robert W. and William A. Steward. The Language Scientist as Expert in the Legal Setting: Issues in Forensic Linguistics [M]. New York: The New York Academy of Science. 1990
Solan, Lawrence M. The Language of Judges [M]. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 1993
Shuy, Roger W. The Language of Confession, Interrogation and Deception [M]. Thousand Oaks CA: Sage. 1987
Tiersma, Peter M. Legal Language [M]. Chicago: the University of Chicago Press, 1999
Walsh, Michael. Interactional Styles in the Courtroom [J]. In J. Gibbons ed., Language and Law. Harlow: Longman. 1994: 217-233
White, P. R.‘An introductory tour through appraisal theory’. http:// www. Grammatics. com / appraisal / Appraisal Outline / UnFramed / Appraisal Outline. htm. 1999
陈令君.英语学术书评的评价:一项基于语料库的研究[D].山东:山东大学,2008
戴凡.格律论和评价系统在语篇中的文体意义[J].中山大学学报,2002,42(5):41-48
杜金榜.法律语言学[M].上海:上海外语教育出版社,2004
胡壮麟.语篇衔接与连贯[M].上海:上海外语教育出版社,1994
胡壮麟.语言学教程[M].北京:外语教学与研究出版社,2001:158
胡壮麟,朱永生,张德禄,李战子.系统功能语言学导论[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2008
黄国文.语篇分析概要[M].长沙:湖南教育出版社,1988
姜望琪.语篇语义学与评价系统[J].外语教学,2009,30(2):1-5
姜望琪.Firth的语篇语义学思想[J].外国语言文学,2008,24(4):1-8
姜望琪.Martin的语篇语义学思想[J].北京科技大学学报,2008,(1):95-104
J.R.马丁,王振华.实现化、实例化和个性化-系统功能语言学的三种层次关系[J].上海交通大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2008,16(5):73-81
李发根.评价的识别、功能和参数[J].外语与外语教学,2006,(11):1-3
李振宇.法律语言学新说[M].北京:中国检查出版社,2006
廖美珍.国外法律语言学研究综述[J].当代语言学,2004,6(1):66-76
廖美珍.法庭语言技巧[J].北京:法律出版社,2005
刘立华,刘世生.语篇建构的互动视角[J].国外外语教学,2006,(3):1-5
马伟林.人际功能的拓展-评价系统述评[J].语言学研究,2007,(6):142-146
宁致远.新编中国法律文书范本-写法、格式与范例[M].北京:知识产权出版社,2005
潘庆云.中国法律语言鉴衡[M].上海:汉语大词典出版社,2004
宋北平.法律语言研究三十年回顾与展望[J].北京政法职业学院学报,2008,(4):31-35
田华静.中国刑事辩护词的语篇语义分析[D].开封:河南大学,2007
王健.沟通两个世界的法律意义—晚清西方法的输入与法律新词初探[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,2001
王洁.法律语言研究[M].广州:广东教育出版社,1997
王振华.评价系统及其运作-系统功能语言学的新发展[J].外国语,2001,(6):13-20.
王振华.马丁论语篇格律[A].见黄国文,杨炳钧.《语篇·功能·教学》[M].广州:中山大学出版社,2002:178-186
王振华.“物质过程”的评价价值-以分析小说人物形象为例[J].外国语,2004,(5):41-47
王振华.介入:言语活动的一种评价视角[D].开封:河南大学,2004
闻兴媛.民事诉状叙事结构的主位研究[J].中山大学学报论丛,2007,27(4):190-195
杨敏.法律语篇权力意志研究[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,2007
余志纯.法律语言学[M].西安:陕西人民教育出版社,2007
余叔通,文嘉.新汉英法学词典[M].北京:法律出版社,1998
张德禄,刘世铸.形式与意义的范畴化-兼评《评价语言―英语的评价系统》[J].外语教学与研究,2006,38(6):423-427
张昕.从评价理论角度分析英语学术书评[D].成都:西南交通大学,2006
赵景林.民用法律文书大全(第四版) [M].北京:群众出版社,2003