Dünya Dilbiliminde ve Özbek Dilbiliminde Dilbilimsel Uzmanlığın İncelenmesi

F.S. Kurbanova

doi:10.71078/v059s843

Authors

F.S. Kurbanova Adana Alparslan Turkesh Science and Technology University Author

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.71078/v059s843

Keywords:

forensic linguistics, textual, philological, stylistic, semantic

Abstract

The history of linguistic expertise is closely connected with the development of the relationship between linguistics and legal sciences. This field took shape as a scientific discipline in the twentieth century and is now widely used in legal systems. The field remains relevant not only from a theoretical perspective but also in practice, as methods and technologies of linguistic expertise are continuously being updated.

Scholars consider the term forensic linguistic expertise to be a collective concept. Previously, terms such as textual, philological, stylistic, and semantic expertise were used. However, the growing demand within the legal system for solving various expert issues related to speech activity has necessitated the adoption of a new term that is easily understood by a wider audience. As a result, the term linguistic expertise has become firmly established in expert practice. Ultimately, forensic linguistic expertise has emerged as an independent type of forensic examination. It is applied in cases where identifying offenses committed through oral or written statements is impossible or extremely difficult without the use of specialized linguistic knowledge.

Language and speech units, as well as all types of texts recorded orally, in writing, or in electronic form, are considered objects of linguistic expertise.

Author Biography

F.S. Kurbanova, Adana Alparslan Turkesh Science and Technology University

Lecturer

References

Adger, C.T., Wolfram, W., & Christian, D. (2007). Okullarda ve topluluklarda lehçeler (2. bs.). Mahwah, NJ. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Alim, H.S. (2004). You know my steez: Siyah Amerikalı bir konuşma topluluğunda üslup değiştirme üzerine etnografik ve sosyodilbilimsel bir çalışma (Cilt 89). Durham, NC. Duke University Press.

Au, K.H., & Kawakami, A. (1985). Research currents: Talk story and learning to read. Language Arts, 62, 406–411. DOI: https://doi.org/10.58680/la198525838

Ball, A.F. (1992). Afro-Amerikalı ergenlerin açıklayıcı yazılarında kültürel tercih. Written Communication, 9(4), 501–532. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088392009004003

Ball, A.F. (2000). Çok kültürlü öğrencilerin öğrenmesini geliştiren güçlendirici pedagojiler. Teachers College Record, 102(6), 1006–1034. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/0161-4681.00090

Baratz, J. (1969). Ekonomik olarak dezavantajlı Siyah çocuklarda dil yeterliğini belirlemeye yönelik iki lehçeli bir görev. Child Development, 40(3), 889–901. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.1969.tb04550.x

Baratz, J., & Shuy, R. (Ed.). (1969). Siyah çocuklara okuma öğretimi. Washington, DC. Center for Applied Linguistics.

Baugh, J. (2000). Ebonics’in ötesinde: Dilsel gurur ve ırksal önyargı. New York, NY. Oxford University Press.

Blake, R., & Cutler, C. (2003). Afro-Amerikan İngilizcesi ve öğretmen tutumlarındaki değişkenlik: Okul felsefesi meselesi mi? Linguistics and Education, 14(2), 163–194. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0898-5898(03)00034-2

Bohn, A. (2003). Tanıdık sesler: İlköğretim sınıflarında Ebonics iletişim tekniklerinin kullanımı. Urban Education, 38(6), 688–707. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085903257315

Boone, P. (2003). “Amen köşesi” sınıfa geldiğinde: Siyah kolej sınıfında çağrı–yanıt iletişiminin pedagojik ve kültürel etkileri. Communication Education, 52(3-4), 212–229. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0363452032000156208

Brown, D.W. (2009). Başka bir deyişle: Dilbilgisi, kod değiştirme ve akademik yazma üzerine dersler. Portsmouth, NH. Heinemann.

Sternin, I.A. (2004). Adli dilbilimsel uzmanlıkta hakaretin teori ve uygulaması. Kommunikativnye Issledovaniya, 191–199. Voronej. [Rusça]