Legal Transcript Analysis Plan

                                              Legal Transcript Analysis Plan

           Paragraph one:

• Overview of the text
• Bar has instrumental power(status and political power- Wareings theory)
• We assume that bar is the more dominant speaker therefore having the most power- Fairclough’s theory of unequal encounters.
   

Paragraph two:

“So many times Mr Neil” it is underlined for emphasis- gives a sense of mocking, change in tone could hint at an almost a patronising sound, which possibly indicates his authority over Mr Neil- use of bald on record. Flouting the maxim of manner.

• “er” although it seems that Bar is the more powerful figure he does use fillers this could be seen as lowering his status as we don’t necessarily think of people in power using fillers although in this circumstance it could be because he is looking at a sheet which would have notes on the case.
• “or not”//” I don’t think they did no” the overlap could show competitive and that Mr Neil is eager to prove his innocence this could show a change in power as overlapping is done by the more dominant speaker. The tone that the bar used could have suggested to Mr Neil that the question had already been asked “you can’t remember whether they came to see you?” the use of “or not” is fairly irrelevant and the question still had the same intonation.

 

          Overview:

          

As this transcript is set in a court it is clear that there is going to be a distinction between the barrister and Mr Neil. The barrister has instrumental power in the court as he is legally trained and is trying to handle the problem. Mr Neil, who is the witness tried to gain influential power in court by taking away the barristers power. The transcript tells us that the court was Scottish so there was some language change “shopped you to the police” this gave quite an informal tone and not one that we would expect from a court of law.



PEE Paragraphs:



In this text the barrister (bar) is questioning a witness (Mr Neil) about the man on trial (Mr Peterson)as it is a court case we would expect the barrister to be the more dominant speaker "isn't that right?" this showcases Norman Fairclough's theory of unequal encounters as it is his job to interrogate witnesses. The barrister has both instrumental and influential power, this is because the barrister has the power to dictate the conversation and he is in a higher political position than Mr Neil "according to you Mr Neil" demonstrating Wareings theory.


The barrister tries to showcase his authority by making Mr Neil uncomfortable “So many times Mr Neil” the use of the underlining here shows that the barrister spoke with emphasis, the tone change here could also hint at an almost patronising and mocking sound which possibly indicates his authority over Mr Neil this is flouting the maxim of manner and a use of bald on record.  In the transcript we also see an overlap "or not"//"I don't think they did no" the overlap could show competitiveness and that Mr Neil is eager to prove his innocence this could show a change in power as we tend to see overlapping done by the dominant speaker. The tone that the barrister used could have suggested that the question had already been asked "you can't remember whether they came to see you?" the use of "or not" is fairly irrelevant and the question still had the same intonation.