Other-repetition and reformulation in courtroom interrogations: other-initiated repair, register and empathic understanding of the other’s perspective

Abstract

This study examines the main functions of other-repetition and (re) formulation in the discourse of lawyers, judges and prosecutors in courtroom interrogations. Applying Conversation Analysis and basing on the analysis of their sequential structure, they are classified into two main categories (Persson, 2020): other-initiated repairs (Schegloff et al., 1977) and registering (Schegloff ,1997). The findings suggest that the first one tends to be carried out through (re)formulations of the witness’ speech and the second one, through repetitions or slight reformulations. In addition, a third function has been identified in the corpus: repetition and (re)formulation can also be used to express empathic understanding (Rogers, 1975), to establish rapport with the witness that facilitates his/her collaboration with the narrative the interrogator intends to construct. In the three functions identified, repetitions and (re)formulations tend to serve the main strategic purposes of argumentation in court: shaping the witness’ narrative to subsume the facts in the legal categories the interrogator intends to defend and questioning the credibility of the witness to undermine his/her testimony