Il discorso riportato nei processi. Tipologie e funzioni


Abstract


Abstract – This paper aims tocontribute to the reflection on the use of reported speech in the judiciaryfield.The scenario of reference chosenis the trial following the “Erba Massacre” which took place on 11thDecember 2006. A linguistic analysis was conducted on the material used duringthe episodes of the TV programme “Un giorno in Pretura” that dealt with thiscase. A critical examination of the comments reveals from a linguistic point ofview the considerable incidence of reported speech in communicative contexts ofcontrolled public speaking.The introduction briefly outlinesthe theoretics behind the main forms of reported speech, i.e. “direct” and“indirect”, as well as the functions attributed to each. The next sectionprovides a detailed analysis of collected data samples, which point out howdifficult and at times impossible it is to pinpoint one particular function asthe main feature for any given form of reported speech.In conclusion, it may be saidthat also in the judiciary field, the need emerges to take into considerationthe fact that reported speech has a wide range of possible functions and tocarry out a functional analysis that may highlight the main functions on a caseby case basis, depending on the communicative context in which it appears.

DOI Code: 10.1285/i22390359v12p65

Keywords: Reported speech; Trial; Communicative functions; Pragmatics; Linguistics

References


Beccaria G.L. 1999 (1994), Dizionario di Linguistica e di Filologia, Metrica, Retorica, Einaudi, Torino.

Bellucci P., Antognoli S., Carmignani B., Grimaldi M. 1998, Studi di sociolinguistica giudiziaria italiana, in

Alfieri e Cassola A. (a cura di), La «Lingua d’Italia» Usi pubblici e istituzionali, Bulzoni, Roma, pp. 226-268.

Berretta M. 2000 (1993), Morfologia, in Sobrero A.S. (a cura di) Introduzione all’italiano contemporaneo. Le strutture, Laterza, Roma/Bari, pp. 193-245.

Berruto G. 2002 (1998), Sociolinguistica dell’italiano contemporaneo, Carocci, Roma.

Calaresu E. 2000, Il discorso riportato: una prospettiva testuale, Il Fiorino, Modena.

Calaresu E. 2009 (2004), Testuali parole. La dimensione pragmatica e testuale del discorso riportato, FrancoAngeli, Milano.

Chafe W. 1982, Integration and involvement in speaking, writing and oral literature, in Tannen D. (ed.) Spoken and written language: Exploring orality and literacy, Ablex, Norwood, pp. 35-53.

Coulmas F. 1986, Reported speech: Some general issues, in Coulmas F. (ed.), Direct and Indirect Speech, Trend in Linguistics, Studies and Monographs 31, Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin, pp. 1-28.

D’Angelo M. 1994, Alcuni aspetti semantici del discorso riportato e l’analisi degli spazi mentali, in “Lingua e Stile” 29 [1], pp. 3-24.

Dardano M. e Trifone P. 20065 (2002), Grammatica italiana modulare, Zanichelli, Bologna.

Ducrot O. 1980, Analyse de textes et linguistique de l’énonciation, in Ducrot O. et al., Les mots du discours, Editions de Minuit, Paris, pp. 7-56.

Genette G. 1972, Figures III, Seuil, Paris; trad. it. 2003, Figure III. Discorso del racconto, Einaudi Torino.

Giani D. 2005, Il discorso diretto riportato nell’italiano parlato, in Burr E. (ed), Tradizione & innovazione. Il parlato: teoria, corpora, linguistica dei corpora, Franco Cesati, Firenze, pp. 293-305.

Granovetter M. 1973, The strenght of weak ties, in “American Journal of Sociology” 78, pp. 1360-1380.

Günthner S. 1997, The contextualization of affect in reported dialogues, in Niemeier S. and Dirven R. (eds), The language of emotions. Conceptualization, Expression, and Theoretical foundation, John Benjamins Publishing Company, Amsterdam/Philadelphia, pp. 247-275.

Hilty G. 1973, Imaginatio reflexa, in “Vox Romanica” 32, pp. 40-59.

Li C.N. 1986, Direct speech and indirect speech: A functional study, in Coulmas F. (ed.), Direct and Indirect Speech, Trend in Linguistics, Studies and Monographs 31, Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin, pp. 29-45.

Mayes P. 1990, Quotation in Spoken English, in “Studies in Language” 14 [2], pp. 325-363.

Milroy J. and Milroy L. 1985, Linguistic Change, Social Network and Speaker innovation, in “Journal of Linguistics” 21, pp. 339-384; trad. it. di Scaglione S. 2003 Il mutamento linguistico, la rete sociale e l’innovazione del parlante, in Giannini S. e Scaglione S. (a cura di), Introduzione alla sociolinguistica, Carocci, Roma, pp. 91-149.

Mizzau M. 2002 (1994), La finzione del discorso riportato, in F. Orletti (a cura di), Fra conversazione e discorso. L’analisi dell’interazione verbale, La Nuova Italia Scientifica, Roma, pp. 247-254.

Mortara Garavelli B. 2009 (1985, Sellerio), La parola d’altri: prospettive di analisi del discorso, edizione riveduta da Stefania Sini, Edizioni dell’Orso, Alessandria.

Peri G. 2007, Discorso diretto e discorso indiretto nel Satyricon: due regimi a contrasto, Edizioni della Normale, Pisa.

Serafini M.T. e Arcidiacono L. 2004 (2001, RCS Scuola), La grammatica delle competenze, Morfologia e sintassi, Bompiani per la scuola, Milano.

Serianni L. 2010 (1989, UTET), Grammatica italiana. Italiano comune e lingua letteraria, con la collaborazione di Alberto Castelvecchi, UTET Università, Torino.

Smith B. 1978, On the margins of discourse: The relation of literature to language, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

Tannen D. 1982, (ed.) Spoken and written language: Exploring orality and literacy, Ablex, Norwood.

Tannen D. 2007, Talking voices. Repetition, dialogue, and Imagery in Conversational Discourse, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Tignani B. 2013, Tradurre il discorso riportato. Le versioni italiane di Nana di Émile Zola (1880-2010). http://amsdottorato.unibo.it/5999/ (1.02.2014).

Wierzbicka A. 1974, The semantics of direct and indirect discourse, in “Papers in linguistics” 7, pp. 267-307.


Full Text: pdf

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.
کاغذ a4

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribuzione - Non commerciale - Non opere derivate 3.0 Italia License.