Forensic Linguistics: An In-Depth Exploration

---

Résumé

Forensic linguistics which is an interdisciplinary discipline occupies a middle position between language and law. Its main focus is the analysis of linguistic evidence to aid legal investigations and judicial processes. Initially, forensic linguistics was about the analysis of disputed authorship and threatening letters; but with evolution, the field now includes a wide range of practices, such as speaker identification, discourse analysis in courtroom settings, and linguistic profiling. Forensic linguists contribute at the same time to criminal and civil cases, often providing expert testimony on matters concerning the interpretation of legal documents or the validity of confessions.
This study investigates the methodologies used by forensic linguists, including phonetic analysis, sociolinguistics, corpus linguistics, and pragmatic theory. It also explores the role of language in legal procedures, focusing on how linguistic nuances can influence the outcomes of trials. Notably, the research highlights some important cases where forensic linguistics played a crucial role, illustrating the field's ability to uncover truth and ensure justice. The article also deals with ethical considerations and limitations, particularly regarding the subjectivity of linguistic interpretation and the potential misuse of linguistic evidence.
As legal systems around the world currently face with complex linguistic problems such as multilingualism, dialect variation, and digital communication, this research pinpoints the need for linguistic expertise in legal settings. Problems such as cybercrime and online threats emphasise the relevance of forensic linguistics, especially in identifying authorship and interpreting ambiguous messages. Finally, the paper recomands greater awareness and integration of forensic linguistic practices in judicial frameworks, as well as increased collaboration between linguists, law enforcement, and legal professionals

Mots-clés

Forensic linguistics; Legal discourse; Linguistic evidence; Authorship attribution; Language and law