Skip to content
Surf Wiki
Save to docs
linguistics

From Surf Wiki (app.surf) — the open knowledge base

Forensic linguistics

Application of linguistics to forensics

Forensic linguistics

Summary

Application of linguistics to forensics

Forensic linguistics, legal linguistics, or language and the law is the application of linguistic knowledge, methods, and insights to the forensic context of law, language, crime investigation, trial, and judicial procedure. It is a branch of applied linguistics.

Forensic linguistics is an umbrella term covering many applications to legal contexts. These are often split between written and spoken items. It is common for forensic linguistics to refer only to written text, whereas anything involving samples of speech is known as forensic speech science.

There are principally three areas of application for linguists working on written texts in forensic contexts:

  • understanding language of the written law,
  • understanding language use in forensic and judicial processes, and
  • the provision of linguistic evidence.

Forensic speech science also has many different applications:

  • speaker comparison
  • disputed utterance analysis
  • voice parades
  • speaker profiling
  • audio enhancement and authentication

The discipline of forensic linguistics is not homogeneous; it involves a range of experts and researchers in different areas of the field.

History

The term forensic linguistics first appeared in 1968 when Jan Svartvik, a Swedish professor of linguistics, used it in "The Evans Statements: A Case for Forensic Linguistics" an analysis of statements by Timothy John Evans. It was in regard to re-analyzing the statements given to police at Notting Hill police station, England, in the case of an alleged murder by Evans in 1949. Evans was suspected of murdering his wife and baby, and he was tried and hanged for the crime. Yet, when Svartvik studied the statements allegedly given by Evans, he found that there were different stylistic markers involved, and Evans did not actually give the statements to the police officers as had been stated at the trial. Sparked by this case, forensic linguists in the UK at the time were focused on questioning the validity of police interrogations. As seen in numerous famous cases (e.g. the convictions of Derek Bentley, the Guildford Four, the Bridgewater Three), many of the major concerns were of the statements police officers used. Numerous times, the topic of police register came up– the type of stylist language and vocabulary used by members of the law enforcement when transcribing witness statements.

In the US, forensic linguistics can be traced back as early as 1927 to a ransom note in Corning, New York. The Associated Press reported, "Duncan McLure, of Johnson City, uncle of the [kidnapped] girl, is the only member of the family to spell his name 'McLure' instead of 'McClure'. The letter he received, supposedly from the kidnappers, was addressed to him by the proper name, indicating that the writer was familiar with the difference in spelling." Other work of forensic linguistics in the United States concerned the rights of individuals with regard to understanding their Miranda rights during the interrogation process. The 1963 case of Ernesto Miranda was pivotal to the beginning of the forensic linguistics field. His case led to the creation of the Miranda rights and pushed the focus of forensic linguistics on witness questioning rather than police statements. Various cases came about that challenged whether or not suspects truly understood what their rights meant– leading to a distinction of coercive versus voluntary interrogations. An early application of forensic linguistics in the United States was related to the status of trademarks as words or phrases in the language. One of the bigger cases involved fast food giant McDonald's claiming that it had originated the process of attaching unprotected words to the "Mc" prefix (referred to as McWords) and was unhappy with Quality Inns International's intention of opening a chain of economy hotels to be called "McSleep".

In the 1980s, Australian linguists discussed the application of linguistics and sociolinguistics to legal issues. They discovered that a phrase such as "the same language" is open to interpretation. Aboriginal people have their own understanding of, relationship with, and use of "English" — something that is not always appreciated by speakers of the dominant version of English, i.e. "white English". The Aboriginal people also bring their own culturally-based interactional styles to the interview.

The 2000s saw a considerable shift in the field of forensic linguistics, which has been described as a coming-of-age of the discipline, as it spread to many countries around the world, from Europe to Australia and Japan. Today, not only does the field have professional associations such as the International Association for Forensic Phonetics and Acoustics (IAFPA) founded in 1991 as the International Association for Forensic Phonetics (IAFP), the International Association for Forensic and Legal Linguistics (IAFLL), founded as the International Association of Forensic Linguists (IAFL) in 1993, and the Austrian Association for Legal Linguistics (AALL), founded in 2017, but it can now provide the scientific community with a range of textbooks such as Coulthard, Johnson and Wright (2017), Gibbons (2003), and Olsson (2008).

Additionally, certain leading institutions have developed programs of study and institutes focused on forensic linguistics. In the United States, Hofstra University has developed a master's degree program, and the Institute for Forensic Linguistics, Threat Assessment, and Strategic Analysis, which conducts special projects, research, and internships in forensic linguistics. This institute contains the Forensic Linguistics Capital Case Innocence Project, formed in 2014, which involves supervised interns reanalyzing language data in capital punishment cases to locate any possibilities of appeal. In the United Kingdom, Aston University has developed master's degree and Ph.D. programs as well as the Aston Institute for Forensic Linguistics (AIFL), founded in 2019 and formerly known as the Aston Centre for Forensic Linguistics which was founded in 2008, that studies forensic texts and conducts research using a variety of methods from numerous areas of linguistics. The University of York also provides a master's degree and Ph.D. programmes in forensic speech science.

Areas of study

The range of topics within forensic linguistics is diverse, but research occurs in the following areas:

Communication problems may occur between the written law and lay persons due to the complex nature of the language and vocabulary used in these legal texts. Forensic linguists will study these texts to understand how these issues arise, and if necessary, provide explanations or translations of the contents.

One area of the language of legal texts encompasses the Miranda warning in the United States. These warnings let the defendant know that they have the right to be silent, since whatever they say from the moment they are in police custody can and will be used against them in a court of law. The recipients who are advised of these rights must have a certain level of competency in the English language in order to completely understand the warning.

Among other things, this area examines language as it is used in cross-examination, evidence presentation, judge's direction, police cautions, police testimonies in court, summing up to a jury, interview techniques, the questioning process in court, and in other areas such as police interviews.

Police officers use specific language to elicit certain responses from civilians. Because of a police officer's social stature, and the way they often phrase "requests" as "commands", people may be confused as to what their rights are when they are being questioned by police. Officers use linguistic tactics including putting the blame onto the victim and asking questions with ambiguous phrasing to elicit specific responses from people. In addition, language structure in witness or suspect interviews can have an impact on the statements which are made from these. In the case of Derek Bentley, elicitation of a narrative through questions rather than a natural account resulted in a wrongful prosecution and sentence of the death penalty. Analysis of the statement revealed the statement was not Bentley's own words and was constructed by the police officers.

When a victim is invoking their right to a lawyer, there are directions stating that the request may not come off as ambiguous. In fact, if the request is not stated in a way that the officer deems to be clear, the victim may not receive their request for counsel at all.

During the examination process, language plays a substantial role in the presentation of a story to the courtroom. A defendant's ambiguity may be deemed unacceptable. The language used by the lawyer to construct the story to the courtroom elicits specific responses from the witness, and specific emotions from the jury. For example, in an instance where a lawyer is examining a hostile witness, they will often use language to limit the response of the witness, in order to avoid having the witness present conflicting evidence. In this instance, yes/no questions will be targeted, and questions with room for elaboration, such as wh-formation questions, will likely be avoided. In a situation where a lawyer interviews a friendly witness whose testimony could potentially strengthen the story constructed by the lawyer, the opposite may occur, where wh-questions are targeted to allow for elaboration.

Lawyers employ specific tactics for both themselves and their witnesses to come off as more or less truthful to the jury and the people of the courtroom. For example, the lawyer may refer to the witness by their first name or a nickname to humanize the witness, or they may speak using slang in order to create less social distance between themselves and the courtroom. The lawyer may also avoid using slang, and instead use complicated law terminology to set themselves apart from the courtroom and define their status.

The lawyer works in constructing the language of the legal process of the courtroom, and specific witnesses may respond to the lawyer's questions in different ways, eliciting new language tactics and opinions from the jury. For example, witnesses may use direct or indirect speech based on their previous societal experiences, gender differences, socioeconomic differences, or differences in education level. Using particular dialects, slang, or sentence formations could assist in making the witness more or less truthful to the jury.

Since language can be used to elicit responses in the legal process, the right to an interpreter plays a part in the fairness of the trial. "The right to an interpreter is essentially a procedural right that derives from the right to a fair trial: everyone charged with a criminal offence has the right to certain minimum procedural guarantees, and these include the right to the free assistance of an interpreter where s/he cannot understand or speak the language of the concerned court."

Forensic text types

Emergency call

In an emergency call, the recipient or emergency operator's ability to extract primarily linguistic information in threatening situations and to come up with the required response in a timely manner is crucial to the successful completion of the call. Emphasis on intonation, voice pitch, and the extent to which there is cooperation between the caller and the recipient at any one time are also very important in analyzing an emergency call. Full cooperation includes frank and timely responses.

Urgency plays a role in emergency calls, so hesitations, signs of evasiveness, and incomplete or overly short answers indicate that the caller might be making a false or hoax call. A genuine call has distinctive interlocking and slight overlap of turns. The recipient trusts the caller to provide accurate information and the caller trusts the recipient to ask only pertinent questions. If the caller uses a rising pitch at the end of every turn, it might represent a lack of commitment; the recipient's use of a rising pitch indicates doubt or desire for clarification. The call ideally moves from nil knowledge on the part of the recipient to a maximum amount of knowledge in a minimum possible period of time. This makes the emergency call unlike any other kind of service encounter.

Ransom demands or other threat communication

Threat is a counterpart of a promise and is an important feature in a ransom demand. Ransom demands are also examined to identify between genuine and false threats. An example of a ransom note analysis can be seen in the case of the Lindbergh kidnapping, where the first ransom note (sometimes referred to as the Nursery Note) stated: "We warn you for making anyding public or for notify the Polise the child is in gut care". In the sentence, the kidnapper makes the claim that the child is in good hands, but to make such a claim, the note would have to have been written before the perpetrator entered the premises. Therefore, the claim is false (at the time of writing) since the kidnapper had not even encountered the child when he wrote the note.

Kidnappers may write statements that later end up being true, such as "your child is being held in a private location" being written ahead of time.

Ransom demands in the style of written notes have been present in many notable cases. The style of writing used in a ransom note is examined by forensic linguists in order to determine the writing's true intent, as well as to determine who wrote the note. Forensic linguists look at factors such as syntactic structures, stylistic patterns, punctuation, and even spelling while analyzing ransom notes. In the case of the Lindbergh ransom note, forensic linguists compared similarities of writing styles from the note to that of writing of the suspect, creating a better chance at discovering who wrote the note.

Bomb threats are another form of threat communication. It is the forensic linguist's job to determine the validity of the statement and if the note has been tampered with. Linguists often work with other interrelated fields such as cyber analysts if the threat is made through text or an internet forum to test for validity or alterations.

Suicide letters

Stefan Zweig Suicide Letter

A suicide note is typically brief, concise, and highly propositional with a degree of evasiveness. A credible suicide letter must be making a definite unequivocal proposition in a situational context. The proposition of genuine suicide is thematic, directed to the addressee (or addressees), and relevant to the relationship between them and the writer. Suicide notes generally have sentences alluding to the act of killing oneself, or the method of suicide that was undertaken. The contents of a suicide note could be intended to make the addressee suffer or feel guilt. Genuine suicide letters are short, typically less than 300 words in length. Extraneous or irrelevant material is often excluded from the text.

Death row statements

Death row statements either admit the crime, leaving the witness with an impression of honesty and forthrightness, or deny the crime, leaving the witness with an impression of innocence. They may also denounce witnesses as dishonest, critique law enforcement as corrupt in an attempt to portray innocence, or seek an element of revenge in their last moments. Death row statements are made within the heavily institutionalized setting of death row prisons.

The Forensic Linguistics Institute holds a corpus of these documents and is conducting research on them.

Social media

Social media statements are often context-specific, and their interpretation can be highly subjective. Forensic application of a selection of stylistic and stylometric techniques has been done in a simulated authorship attribution case involving texts in relation to Facebook. Analysis of social media postings can reveal whether they are illegal (e.g. sex trade) or unethical (e.g. intended to harm) or whether they are not (e.g. simply provocative or free speech).

Additional concepts

Linguistic fingerprinting

A linguistic fingerprint is a concept put forward by some scholars that each human being uses language differently, and that this difference between people involves a collection of markers which stamps a speaker/writer as unique, similar to a fingerprint. Under this view, it is assumed that every individual uses languages differently and this difference can be observed as a fingerprint. It is formed as a result of merged language style. A person's linguistic fingerprint can be reconstructed from the individual's daily interactions and relate to a variety of self-reported personality characteristics, situational variables, and physiological markers (e.g. blood pressure, cortisol, testosterone). In the process of an investigation, the emphasis should be on the relative rather than absolute difference between the authors and how investigators can classify their texts. John Olsson, however, argues that although the concept of linguistic fingerprinting is attractive to law enforcement agencies, there is so far little hard evidence to support the notion.

Variation

Intra-author variations are the ways in which one author's texts differ from each other. Inter-author variations are the ways in which different authors' writing varies. Two texts by one author do not necessarily vary less than texts by two different authors.

  • Genre: When texts are being measured in different genres, considerable variation is observed even though they are by the same author.
  • Text Type: Personal letters contain more inter-relationship bonding strategies than academic articles or term papers.
  • Fiction vs. Non-Fiction: Some fiction writers are journalists. Due to the different demands of each medium, they can be completely different from one another and this results in intra-author variation.
  • Private vs. Public: A politician writing a political speech, which is a public text, will differ greatly from a private text to a friend or family member.
  • Time lapse: The greater the time lapse between two works, the greater the likely variation. Language use can change in a relatively short span of time, influencing susceptibility to language change in the environment.
  • Disguise: A writer can publish pseudonymously or anonymously, disguising output to prevent recognition.

Forensic transcription

The two main types of transcriptions are written documents and video and audio records. Accurate, reliable text transcription is important because the text is the data which becomes the available evidence. If a transcription is wrong, the evidence is altered. If there is failure to transcribe the full text, evidence is once again altered unwittingly. There must be emphasis on the text being the evidence. A transcription of an audio file should never be assumed to be completely accurate. Each type of transcription contains its own problems. A handwritten document might contain unusual spellings which may result in ambiguous meanings, illegible handwriting, and illustrations that are difficult to comprehend. A scanned document is tricky, as scanning may alter the original document. Audio and video documents can include repetitions, hesitation, nonsensical talk, jargon which can be hard to understand, and speakers mumbling incoherently and inaudibly. Non-linguistic sounds such as crying and laughing may also be included in the audio and video text which cannot be transcribed easily. Because of this, civil libertarians have argued that interrogations in major criminal cases should be recorded and the recordings kept, as well as transcribed.

Digital Communication

Digital communicative texts, such as social media posts or text messages, typically display features which are not seen in traditional linguistics. Individuals may employ a variety of methods to convey paralanguage in order to better communicate tone of voice, volume, and expression, such as using capital letters to portray shouting.

With the rise of digital communication, the world has also seen an increase in the use of emoji and emoticons, which are often used to replace non-verbal gestures or facial expressions. The use of emoji and emoticons for authorship identification is still a relatively new idea in forensic linguistics.

References

  • Coulthard, M. and Johnson, A. (2007)
  • Forensic linguistics; An Introduction to Language, Crime and Law (with original cases in Bureau of Police Investigation and Courts) by Azizi, Syrous & Momeni, Negar, Tehran: JahadDaneshgahi Publication, 2012
  • Nini, Andrea. "An Authorship Analysis of the Jack the Ripper Letters." Digital Scholarship in the Humanities, vol. 33, no. 3, 2018, pp. 621–636., https://doi.org/10.1093/llc/fqx065.

References

  1. "Centre for Forensic Linguistics". Aston University.
  2. (2021-03-30). "What is forensic speech science?".
  3. Olsson, John. (2008). "Forensic Linguistics". Continuum.
  4. Olsson, John. "What is Forensic Linguistics?".
  5. (1927-09-09). "Think Corning Girl Wrote Ransom Note". Plattsburgh Daily Press.
  6. Ayres, Jr, B. Drummond. (22 July 1988). "McDonald's, to Court: 'Mc' Is Ours". [[The New York Times]].
  7. Okawara, Mami Hiraike. (2018). "International Perspectives on Translation, Education and Innovation in Japanese and Korean Societies". Springer.
  8. Leisser, Daniel. (2017-05-05). "Gründung der Österreichischen Gesellschaft für Rechtslinguistik".
  9. "The Routledge Handbook of Forensic Linguistics". Routledge.
  10. "Linguistics Institute: Home {{!}} Hofstra University".
  11. "Linguistics: Innocence Project {{!}} Hofstra University".
  12. "Aston Institute for Forensic Linguistics {{!}} Aston University".
  13. Coulthard, Malcolm. (2010). "Forensic Linguistics: the application of language description in legal contexts". Langage et société.
  14. Umiyati, Mirsa. (2020). "A Literature Review of Forensic Linguistics". International Journal of Forensic Linguistics.
  15. Pavlenko, Aneta. (March 2008). ""I'm Very Not About the Law Part": Nonnative Speakers of English and the Miranda Warnings". TESOL Quarterly.
  16. (2005). "Speaking of Crime: The Language of Criminal Justice". University of Chicago Press.
  17. (2002). "Language and the Legal Process". Palgrave Macmillan.
  18. (2013). "Forensic Linguistics". Bloomsbury.
  19. Ali, Siddig Ahmed. (November 2013). "The Role of Forensic Translation in Courtroom Contexts". Arab World English Journal.
  20. "The Kidnapping". PBS Online.
  21. Falzini, Mark W.. (9 September 2008). "The Ransom Notes: An Analysis of Their Content & 'Signature'". Archival Ramblings.
  22. Potts, Kimberly. (2016-09-17). "'The Case Of: JonBenét Ramsey': Investigator Says He and His Colleagues Will Name a Suspect".
  23. (2023-05-23). "Forensic linguistics: A scientometric review". Cogent Arts & Humanities.
  24. Olsson, John. (2004). "An Introduction to Language Crime and the Law". Continuum International Publishing Group.
  25. Michell, C.S.. (2013). "Investigating the use of forensic stylistic and stylometric techniques in the analysis of authorship on a publicly accessible social networking site (Facebook)". University of South Africa.
  26. C. Hardaker (2015). The ethics of online aggression: Where does "virtual" end, and "reality" begin? BAAL Conference on The Ethics of Online Research Methods. Cardiff.
  27. Coulthard, M. (2004). Author identification, idiolect and linguistic uniqueness. ''Applied Linguistics'', 25(4), 431-447.
  28. Labov, William (1972) ''Sociolinguistic patterns''. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press, p192.
  29. Miller, C.. (1984). "Genre as social action". Quarterly Journal of Speech.
  30. Grant, T. D.. (2008). "Dimensions of Forensic Linguistics". John Benjamins.
  31. Morton, A.Q., and S. Michaelson (1990) ''The Qsum Plot''. Internal Report CSR-3-90, Department of Computer Science, University of Edinburgh.
  32. (2014-12-19). "Forensic Linguistics: A Brief Overview of the Key Elements". Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences.
  33. (2014-06-05). "WHEN HELEN FROZE OVER".
  34. (11 October 1991). "Boston U. Panel Finds Plagiarism by Dr. King". The New York Times.
  35. (2004). "Profilers: Leading investigators take you inside the criminal mind". Prometheus Books.
  36. "Discourse Analysis in the Legal Context - Roger W. Shuy".
  37. Martin Fido (1994), ''The Chronicle of Crime: The infamous felons of modern history and their hideous crimes''
  38. Coulthard, M., & Johnson, A. (2007). ''An introduction to forensic linguistics: Language in evidence''. Oxford: Routledge:162-3.
  39. Butters, Ronald R.. (2011-05-13). "Forensic Linguistics". Journal of English Linguistics.
  40. Jones, Abigail. (2017-07-29). "'Manhunt: Unabomber' explores how a federal investigator caught Ted Kaczynski and changed FBI profiling forever". Newsweek.
  41. Tiersma, Peter. "forensic linguistics".
  42. Coulthard, R.M. (2000). " ''Whose text is it? On the linguistic investigation of authorship'' ", in S. Sarangi and R.M. Coulthard: ''Discourse and Social Life''. London, Longman.
  43. (February 1999). "Entrevista con Salvador Morales Garibay".
  44. (23 September 2009). "PGR ordena la captura y devela la identidad del Subcomandante Marcos (9 de febrero 1995)".
  45. (23 July 2015). "MEXICO: CRACKDOWN ON ZAPATISTA REBELS".
  46. (5 August 2002). "Marcos, en la mira de Zedillo".
  47. (10 December 2006). "Marcos sí es Sebastián Guillén".
  48. Trejo, Ángel. (22 May 2006). "La Otra campaña, pintada de azul". Buzos.
  49. (6 August 1995). "Maestros y condiscípulos de Tampico recuerdan a Rafael Sebastián Guillén".
  50. Svoboda, Elizabeth. (11 May 2009). "Speech Patterns in Messages Betray a Killer". The New York Times.
  51. (8 November 2005). "Life term for man who shot lover". BBC News.
  52. Mitchell, Elizabeth. (8 September 2008). "The case for forensic linguistics". BBC News.
  53. British Association for the Advancement of Science. (2008-09-08). "Txt Crimes, Sex Crimes And Murder: The Science of Forensic Linguistics".
  54. Trial of Rehan Asghar, Central Criminal Court, London, January 2008.
  55. Eagleson, Robert. (1994). 'Forensic analysis of personal written texts: a case study', John Gibbons (ed.), ''Language and the Law'', London: Longman, 362–373.
  56. (11 December 2009). "Man Jailed over Wife Fire Murder".
  57. "Professor Tim Grant".
  58. Oliver, Huw. (9 April 2015). "Forensic Linguists Use Spelling Mistakes to Help Convict Criminals".
  59. Pennebaker, J. W. (1990). 'Physiological factors influencing the reporting of physical symptoms'. ''The Science of Self-report: Implications for Research and Practice.'' Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum Publishers, pp. 299-316
  60. Groot, Hester. (2024-10-01). "Markus Schiegg and Judith Huber: Intra-Writer Variation in Historical Sociolinguistics". Journal of Historical Sociolinguistics.
  61. Hernández-Campoy, Juan Manuel. (2013-01-01). "The effects of public and individual language attitudes on intra-speaker variation: A case study of style-shifting". Multilingua - Journal of Cross-Cultural and Interlanguage Communication.
  62. (15 June 2004). "Recording Police Questioning". The New York Times.
  63. Marko, Karoline. (2022-03-03). ""Depends on Who I'm Writing To"—The Influence of Addressees and Personality Traits on the Use of Emoji and Emoticons, and Related Implications for Forensic Authorship Analysis". Frontiers in Communication.
Wikipedia Source

This article was imported from Wikipedia and is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Content has been adapted to SurfDoc format. Original contributors can be found on the article history page.

Want to explore this topic further?

Ask Mako anything about Forensic linguistics — get instant answers, deeper analysis, and related topics.

Research with Mako

Free with your Surf account

Content sourced from Wikipedia, available under CC BY-SA 4.0.

This content may have been generated or modified by AI. CloudSurf Software LLC is not responsible for the accuracy, completeness, or reliability of AI-generated content. Always verify important information from primary sources.

Report