Aliaksandr L. Dziadzinkin

Associate Professor, PhD in History, Professor of the Department of Law and Social Sciences and Humanitie

Vitebsk Branch of International University «MITSO»

(Vitebsk, Belarus)

DOI: https://doi.org/10.22405/2712-8407-2024-2-86-93

Abstract. The article provides an analysis of the methods of forensic linguistic examination of disputed texts used in the Russian Federation and the Republic of Belarus. According to the author, when using a particular method, the main task of a linguist expert is to establish a correlation between the legal facts reflected in speech works and the corresponding linguistic features. The author states that in the Republic of Belarus, when analyzing texts of allegedly extremist content, the role of an expert is often reduced only to stating the identified language parameters, which in some cases does not allow the law enforcement officer to use the conclusions of a linguist to accurately qualify the offense. Based on many years of experience in conducting forensic linguistic research as an expert outside an expert organization, the author suggests using the method of linguistic labeling of conceptual units in expert practice in cases of extremism. The use of this method in the study of extremist materials involves a certain algorithm of actions. First of all, the expert must establish the presence of linguistic markers that are significant for the legal assessment of a speech act as public (openness in the transmission of information by the addressee and the possibility of information perception by the addressee). Next, the expert must identify linguistic markers that correlate with the signs of those verbal offenses referred to in the decision on the appointment of an expert examination: the presence of an incentive intention, the name of the method of performing the action, an indication of the object of the action and the verbalization of the addressee.
Keywords: linguistic expertise, extremism, extremist materials, controversial text, linguistic labeling.

Full text of the article (PDF)

For citation: Dziadzinkin, AL 2024, ‘The Method of Linguistic Labeling of Conceptual Units (from Expert Practice in Cases of Extremism)’, Tula Scientific Bulletin. History. Linguistics, issue 2 (18), pp. 86–93, http://doi.org/10.22405/ 2712-8407-2024-2-86-93 (in Russ.)

References

1. Arkharova, DI 2008, ‘K voprosu o lingvisticheskoy metodike postroyeniya definitsiy yuridicheskikh ponyatiy’ (On the issue of the linguistic methodology for constructing definitions of legal concepts), Theory and Practice of Forensic Science, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 189–193. (In Russ.).
2. Bazhin, DA 2011, ‘K voprosu o ponimanii publichnosti v ugolovnom prave’ (On the understanding of publicity in criminal law), Russian Juridical Journal, no. 2, pp. 162–168. (In Russ.).
3. Baranov, AN 2019, ‘Oskorbleniye i unizheniye kak yazykovyye i pravovyye fenomeny’ (Insult and Humiliation as Language and Law Phenomena), Russkiy yazyk: istoricheskiye sudby i sovremennost. VI Mezhd. kongress issledovateley russkogo yazyka (Russian language: historical destinies and modernity. 6th Int. Congress of Russian Language Researchers), March 20-23, MGU publ, Moscow, pp. 312–313. (In Russ.).
4. Belchikov, YuA 2010, Metodicheskiye rekomendatsii po voprosam lingvisticheskoy ekspertizy spornykh tekstov SMI (Methodological recommendations on the issues of linguistic expertise of controversial media texts), IPK «Informkniga» publ, Moscow. (In Russ.).
5. Brinev, KI 2016, Spravochnik po sudebnoy lingvisticheskoy ekspertize (Handbook of Forensic Linguistic Expertise), Librokom publ, Moscow. (In Russ.).
6. Doronina, SV 2015, ‘«Komandir! Mozhet, dogovorimsya?»: priemy diskursivnogo analiza v lingvisticheskoj ekspertize tekstov po antikorrupcionnym delam’ ("Let's agree, commander!": The methods of discourse analysis in the linguistic examination of corruption speech crimes), Political Linguistics, no. 3, pp. 245–249. (In Russ.).
7. Kuznetsov, VO 2020, ‘K voprosu ob ekspertnykh ponyatiyakh v sudebnoy lingvisticheskoy ekspertize’ (On the Issue of Expert Terms in Forensic Linguistics), Theory and Practice of Forensic Science, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 29–41. (In Russ.).
8. Kusov, GV 2012, Sudebnaya lingvisticheskaya ekspertiza: ponyatiye, printsipy, protsessualnoye znacheniye (Forensic linguistic expertise: concept, principles, procedural significance), Izdatelskiy Dom – YuG publ, Krasnodar (In Russ.).
9. Lavrinovich, AN 1989, Ekspertnyye ponyatiya v praktike sudebnoy psikhologopsikhiatricheskoy ekspertizy (Expert concepts in the practice of forensic psychological and psychiatric examination), Akad. nauk SSSR publ, Moscow (In Russ.).
10. Osadchiy, MA 2006, ‘Sudebno-lingvisticheskaya ekspertiza verbalnykh form proyavleniya ekstremizma s uchetom izmeneniy ot 27.07.2006’ (Forensic linguistic examination of verbal forms of extremism, taking into account the changes of 27 July 2006), Ugolovnyy protsess, no. 10, pp. 37–42. (In Russ.).
11. Osadchiy, MA 2013, Russkiy yazyk na grani prava: funktsionirovaniye sovremennogo russkogo yazyka v usloviyakh pravovoy reglamentatsii rechi (The Russian language on the verge of law: the functioning of the modern Russian language in the context of legal regulation of speech), Librokom publ, Moscow. (In Russ.).
12. Salikhova, EA 2019, ‘K voprosu o verbalnoy realizatsii prizyva’ (To the Question of the Verbal Realization of Appeal), Political Linguistics, vol. 74, no. 2, pp. 167–176. (In Russ.).
13. Safuanov, FS 2017, ‘Kak postroit predmetnyy vid sudebno-psikhologicheskoy ekspertizy’ (How to construct a subject type of forensic psychological examination), Psychology and Law, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 220–239. (In Russ.).
14. Sternin, IA 2013, Osnovnyye ponyatiya lingvokriminalisticheskoy ekspertizy (The basic concepts of linguistic forensic analysis), Kantsler publ, Yaroslavl. (In Russ.).
15. Yakobson, RO 1985, Izbrannyye raboty (Selected works), Progress publ, Moscow. (In Russ.).