language and power

Plan

barrister - influencial power as the judge would have the instumental power to cause any action to Mr P who is being charged
wareing polictical power
faircloughs unequal encounters

 over lap ..

 "whether they came to see you 'or not?'"
                                                   "'I don't' think they did no"


"that didnt cross your mind 'at all?'"
                                              'no'

possibly a fta as it could mean the barrister is loosing the face needs to vbe respected and liked as the over lap show a lack of respect in turn taking to talk

same quote possibly flouting grices's maxim of quality as he has denied the statement said but doesnt not give any evidence that could prove his point for denying it and is bery  vauge....

In this text the barrister is questioning a witness (Mr N) about his involvement with the man on trial (Mr P). The barrister has both instrumental and influential power, this is because he is in a much higher political position than Mr N and has the power to control the subject topic this is also why Fairclough’s unequal encounters is involved in this text. He also has influential power where he has the ability to influence Mr N’s answers because he can control what he asks the witness so he would state the answers that he could possibly want. As well as this Wareings political power is used in this because the barrister is a lawyer and has the ability to influence and argue the case of Mr P to the judge for this case.

In this text Mr N overlaps the barrister on two different occasions, such as: “whether they came to see you [or not]”

             “[I don’t] think they did no” This might be considered a face threatening act as the barrister is losing the face to be liked and respected, as the witness of a lower power is interrupting the barristers question and is not taking turns to speak. This might be because the witness is becoming impatient with the trial as the barrister is continuingly asking him questions possibly to try and make the witness make a mistake in his answer as he is Mr P’s lawyer. He could be doing this to take the pressure and attention of off Mr P by trying to make the witness look bad. Another possibility is that Mr N overlaps because he is eager to respond to the question being asked and already knows what he is going to say so he jumps in with his response without letting the higher power finish talking.

The witness Mr N could be flouting Grice's maxim of quality. This is shown when the barrister asks "that didn't cross your mind at all?" And the witness replies simply "no" the lack of detail and quality of information in the answer shows he could be possibly hiding something or maybe even trying to avoid giving any details that could make him look undermined.

(BEING EDITED)