Forensic Linguistics: A Conversation Analysis on Prank Calls to Emergency Centers in Iran
Author(s)
Yoones Tavoosy , Reza Jelveh ,
Download Full PDF Pages: 26-38 | Views: 265 | Downloads: 101 | DOI:
Volume 1 - September 2019 (09)
Abstract
this study aims to tamper the role of language and law and introduce the concept of forensic linguistics. It further attempts to investigate the techniques by which language experts can detect deception in emergency phone calls. To this end, a prank call in Persian was analyzed in terms of its interactional properties and some clues are proposed for call takers to detect and evade such calls.
Keywords
Forensic Linguistics, Prank Calls
References
i. American Society for Testing and Materials. (2006). Standard F-1220. Standard Guide for Emergency Medical Services System Telecommunications. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM Committee F30 on Emergency Medical Services.
ii. Garfinkel, H. (1967). Studies in Ethnomethodology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
iii. Goffman, E. (1955). On Face Work. Psychiatry, 18, 213-231.
iv. Grice, Paul (1975). "Logic and conversation". In Cole, P.; Morgan, J. Syntax and Semantics. New York: Academic Press. pp. 41–58.
v. Griffiths, M. (2012). ‘Did he have an accent?’ Forensic speaker descriptions of unknown voices. Proceedings of The International Association of Forensic Linguists’ Tenth Biennial Conference: Centre for Forensic Linguistics; Aston University, UK.
vi. Heritage, J. (2004). Conversation analysis and institutional talk: analysing data. In D. Silverman (Ed.), Qualitative research. 2nd edition (pp. 222-245). London: Sage.
vii. Heritage, J. & Clayman, S. (2010). Talk in action: Interactions, identities, and institutions. Chichester, U.K: Wiley--‐Blackwell. Part 1: Conversation analysis and social institutions.
viii. Jefferson, G. (2004). ‘Glossary of transcript symbols with an introduction.’ In Lerner G (ed.) Conversation analysis. Studies from the first generation. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins. 13–31.
ix. Kasper, G., & Wagner, J. (2011). Conversation analysis as an approach to second language acquisition. In D. Atkinson (Ed.), Alternative approaches to second language acquisition (pp. 117–142). London: Routledge.
x. Laforest, M. (2012). The False Report during an Emergency Call: Using Discourse Analysis to Detect Deceit. Proceedings of the International Association of Forensic Linguists’ Tenth Biennal Conference, Birmingham, Center of forensic linguistics, p. 139-152.
xi. Picornell, I. (2012). The rake’s progress: linguistic strategies for deception. Proceedings of The International Association of Forensic Linguists’ Tenth Biennial Conference: Centre for Forensic Linguistics; Aston University, UK.
xii. Schegloff, E.A. (2003). On Conversation Analysis: An Interview with Emanuel A. Schegloff. In S. Cmejrkova & C. L. Prevignano (Eds.), Discussing Conversation Analysis: The Work of Emanuel A Schegloff (pp. 11-55). Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
xiii. Vafaee, R. & Abbasi, H. Disturbance for 115 Emergency Center of Tehran: Review and Pathology. Salamat Quarterly: V3, No.1, pp.36-46
xiv. Van Naerssen, M. (2009). Exploring issues in ‘faking’/malingering of language proficiency: assessing claims. Paper presented at the International Association of Forensic Linguists 9th Biennial Conference, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
xv. Zimmerman, Don H. 1984. Talk and its occasion: the case of calling the police. In D. Schiffrin (ed.), Meaning, Form, and Use in Context: Linguistic Applications. Georgetown University Round Table on Languages and Linguistics 35. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press, pp. 210–28.
xvi. Zimmerman, Don H. 1992. The interactional organization of calls for emergency assistance. In Paul Drew and John Heritage (eds.), Talk at Work: Social Interaction in Institutional Settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 418–69.
Cite this Article: