USE OF VERBAL SUGGESTIVE INFLUENCE IN LEGAL PRACTICE

Abstract

In the article it is analysed peculiarities of verbal suggestive influence in legal practice, in particular during the proclamation of court speeches. It is considered the use of methods of manipulation (distortion, concealment, ways of presenting information) and methods of «informal logic», the suggestive effect of which is realized through the use of appropriate linguistic means. The lexical and syntactic constructions with the help of which manipulative influence on the participants of the communicative process is carried out are also determined.
It ismentioned that in the process of communicative influence during the proclamation of court speeches there is an integration of logical, rhetorical and psychological methods which enhances the combination of rational and emotional load of verbal complexes and allows obtaining the desired suggestive effect. Involved in this process are all the levels of linguistic suggestion: phonological, nominative, semantic, syntactical and logical, contextual and notional, formal and symbolic. The effectiveness of suggestive influence also depends on the socio and cultural space that acts as a psychosemantic complex of individual and collective consciousness. The presence of certain internal recipient’s settings based on universal behavioural laws promotes priori, extra rational assimilation of external suggestively marked designs. The lack of critical perception while suggestingimposes specific requirements to the participants of the communicative process: authority, prestige, the suggester’squalification andthe recipient’s mental state, the level of his intellectual, emotional and volitional development and experience.
It is proved that the basic principles of legal polemics are logical methods in combination with psychological, neurophysiological, social and linguistic constants. The use of appropriate lexical and syntactic structures during the proclamation of a judicial speech allows to effect manipulative, in particular, suggestive influence on the participants of the litigation due to the natural intentionality of the language.