"Lexical Characteristics and Agency in American Rape Trials: A Critical Discourse Analysis" | ||||
| هرمس | ||||
| Article 8, Volume 13, Issue 1 - Serial Number 47, January 2024, Page 85-112 PDF (558 K) | ||||
| Document Type: المقالة الأصلية | ||||
| DOI: 10.21608/herms.2024.379361 | ||||
 View on SCiNiTO | ||||
| Author | ||||
| Yara Zidan | ||||
| The American University in Cairo | ||||
| Abstract | ||||
| Cross-examinations of rape complainants in American trials have been in question for decades for their perceived grueling nature. Many scholars have argued that a Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) of rape trials can uncover the power asymmetry and ideological frameworks existing in legal practices. Therefore, this paper aims to employ a CDA approach to analyze the legal-linguistic interactions between opposing lawyers and rape complainants. Cross-examination data were obtained from two American rape cases that were well-publicized. The paper primarily focused on exploring lexicalization and agency and their use by cross-examiners in the rape cases. The Critical Discourse Analysis revealed that agency and lexicalization were strategically employed by cross-examiners to ideologically frame the rape incidents, and to either eliminate or obscure the agency of the defendant’s from committing sexual aggression. Finally, based on the findings, the study provides future recommendations and further areas of research. | ||||
| Keywords | ||||
| American rape trials; cross-examinations; rape complainant; lexicalization; agency | ||||
|
Statistics Article View: 109 PDF Download: 103 |
||||
