5. Read the interview once again and make up an abstract in writing. Use the following words and expressions:

According to, in reference to, moreover, furthermore, however, on the one hand, on the other hand, at the same time, in addition, what is more, finally, in the end, at first (firstly), the author mentions/comments on…

6. Read the examples of cases where it is impossible to do without forensic linguists’ help. Working in small groups prepare short reports about possible actions which can be taken to help the investigation.

1. A suicide letter is found near a body. It looks real enough, but how can we tell whether the suicide note is genuine?

2. A woman receives some nasty emails sent from a 'hotmail' account (and therefore apparently untraceable). She is about to start a business and suspects that the emails are from a former business partner, or someone in his family, or alternatively someone who is jealous of her forthcoming success

3. A politician receives hate mail through the postal service. He has no idea who has sent it to him. It threatens to ruin his career.

4. The dean of a law school identifies sections of plagiarized texts from the essays of two final year students. The trouble is the dean does not know which of the two students copied from the other. Can forensic linguistics do this?

7. On the basis of the information you have received prepare a report on the topic “The work of a forensic linguist”.

TEXT 3

1. Read the text and decide whether these statements are true (T) or false (F). If the statement is false, correct it.

1. The classification of areas in forensic linguistics usually follows existing classifications in the structure and function of language.

2. Auditory phonetics is the study of the physical characteristics of speech sounds as they leave their source, move into the air, and gradually dissipate.

3. Forensic phoneticians in their auditory research help the victims and witnesses to indentify the speaker, their class characteristics and age.

4. The focus of semantic analysis in forensic contexts is on the interpretation of words, phrases, sentences, and texts and their meaning in written documents and spoken discourse.

5. Pragmatics deals with the analysis of a speaker’s expressed meaning in actual language use.

6. Qualitative and quantitative methods of author identification are never used together as they have different purposes and spheres of application.

The areas of forensic linguistics

Forensic linguistics is the scientific study of language as applied to forensic purposes and contexts. It is a recent and rapidly growing area of modern applied linguistics. The classification of areas in forensic linguistics evolves as the field develops. It usually follows existing classifications in the structure and function of language. In some cases, however, even narrower specification is needed. For example, studies in forensic phonetics apply, separately or simultaneously, three distinct modes of phonetic description: acoustic, auditory and articulatory.

Auditory and Acoustic Phonetics

Auditory phonetics is the study of language sounds based on what is heard and interpreted by the human listener, i.e., the aural perceptual characteristics of speech. The primary areas of auditory research in forensic phonetics are speaker identification by victims and witnesses, voice perception, imitation and disguise and identification of class characteristics of speakers, including first-language interference, regional or social accent and dialect, and speaker age.

Acoustic phonetics is the study of the physical characteristics of speech sounds as they leave their source (the speaker), move into the air, and gradually dissipate. The primary area of acoustic analysis in forensic phonetics is speaker identification, but many studies have also been done to identify class characteristics of speakers, including physical height and weight, regional, social, or language group, voice and accent disguise, effect of intoxication on speech, and technical aspects of speech samples and recordings.

Semantics vs. Pragmatics: Interpretation of Expressed and Inferred Meaning

Semantics is the study of meaning as expressed by words, phrases, sentences, or texts. The focus of semantic analysis in forensic contexts is on the comprehensibility and interpretation of language that is difficult to understand. The primary areas of research in forensic semantics are the interpretation of words, phrases, sentences, and texts, ambiguity in texts and laws, and interpretation of meaning in spoken discourse, such as reading of rights and police warnings, police interviews, and jury instructions:

Analysis of a speaker’s intended meaning in actual language use is the study of pragmatics. Pragmatics is important for forensic purposes because speakers and writers do not always directly match their words with the meaning that they intend to convey. Since listeners and readers may also be unsuccessful in matching expression to intended meaning, sometimes it may result in mistaken understanding, miscommunication, and, eventually, conflict. Primary areas of pragmatics include analysis of spoken and written language, study of the discourse of specific contexts, such as dictation, conversations, hearings, etc., the language of the courtroom, i.e., of lawyers, clients, questioning, and jury instructions, and language of specific speech acts, such as threats, promises, warnings, etc.

Stylistics and Questioned Authorship

The focus of forensic stylistics is author identification of questioned writings. Linguistic stylistics uses two approaches to authorship identification: qualitative and quantitative. The work is qualitative when features of writing are identified and then described as being characteristic of an author. The work is quantitative when certain indicators are identified and then measured in some way, e.g., their relative frequency of occurrence in a given set of writings. Certain quantitative methods are referred to as stylometry. Qualitative and quantitative methods complement one another and are often used together to identify, describe, and measure the presence or absence of style-markers in questioned and known writings.