Analyzing the Linguistic Norms in Iranian Criminal Courts Based on McMennamin’s Forensic Discourse Model: A Case Study on Karbaschi’s Defense Sessions

This study investigated the linguistic norms in forensic discourse of judge-defendant in criminal courts of the Islamic Republic of Iran and focused on the frequency and the percentage of verbal deviations in the judge and the accused person. The research tool was McMennamin’s (2002) linguistic model concerning the linguistic prescriptive, and descriptive deviations from the linguistic norms. Data were collected through observing fifty 10-minute video clips of Karbaschi’s defendants as the former mayor in Tehran. The data were analyzed statistically through descriptive statistics. Findings were divided into three categories of verbal norms: standard, change and deviation. The findings indicated indicated that usage of words through non-standard language have a vital role in representing the defendant's social status While the judge followed standard norms, Karbaschi changed and deviated from the norms more significantly than the judge did. Findings of the study suggest that forensic discourse implicitly depicts hierarchical level, superordinate and subordinate’s structures within the linguistic community. Social distance determines the formality of situational context while power and solidarity affect people’s interactional communications. Thus, the analysis of judges and accused persons' speeches can lead to identifying the linguistic norms which are correlated to their use of discourse.in the court specifies their individual, social, and forensic status.