法庭開庭和總結陳詞英語演說中的“同一”修辭策略和表現手段

劉諾亞

(荊楚理工學院外國語學院，湖北荊門 448000)

一、“同一”修辭理論及其認知心理學原理

亞里士多德在《修辭學》中認為修辭是邏輯和政治的對等物，把它稱作是一種調動一切可以調動的勸說手段［1］。他提出了演講中勸說的三要素即邏輯訴諸、情感訴諸和人格訴諸(Logos，pathos and ethos)。在肯尼思·伯克的修辭體系中，“同一”的概念是其核心理論，根據伯克的觀點，修辭是用符號(即語言)去誘發合作的行為，即修辭者要達到勸說的目的，必須與受眾者實現“同一”(Identification)。一個人要么試圖通過論辯來勸說其聽眾，他必須根據他們的思維方式來進行;通過情感，就必須具有在某種程度上指望聽眾能有的感情?！巴弧痹诮浑H中的作用已經得到實驗證明［2］，無論是訴諸邏輯、情感還是人格，其最終目的都是為了達到“同一”。這個概念的提出把古典修辭學(其核心是勸說)和新修辭學有機地結合起來并對勸說進行了補充，把在順從和訴諸修辭中整個自覺的和不自覺的動機語言范圍都包括了進去，成為新修辭學的關鍵詞之一。從認知心理學來看，人在同一維度上的心理因素是:價值、態度、需要、信念、認知、情感、知識等等［3］，勸說的“認同”導致心理領域的這些因素的同一性，才能達到形成觀點(態度)，改變觀點(態度)或加強觀點(態度)的目的。在伯克看來，這種“同一”一共有三種策略:同情同一(identification by sympathy)、對立同一(identification by antithesis)和無意識同一(identification by inaccuracy)。所謂“同情同一”，是指在思想、態度、情感、價值、等方面的相同或相似。所謂“對立同一”，是指修辭者與受眾因為具有共同的問題、挑戰、敵人而達到認同。所謂“無意識同一”是指修辭者使用某些手段如圖片、或如類似“我們”的詞語使受眾無意識或潛意識地認同修辭者，想象自己成為修辭者或如修辭所描繪的那樣。法庭是原告代理律師(或公訴人)和辯護律師展示自己的演說和辯論才能的舞臺，是控辯雙方律師的戰場，而法庭辯論和演說是為了進一步闡述和鞏固自己的觀點和立場，駁斥和削弱對方的觀點和立場，與陪審團和法官在以上提到的各個心理因素在心理維度上達到“同一”，最終達到說服陪審團和法官的目的。

二、法庭英語演說中認同策略的表現形式

(一)受眾特點

在西方修辭學中，受眾是指修辭者進行修辭說服從而達到其目的的對象，對受眾的正確把握也是確保演講成功的關鍵因素。在西方大多數國家里實行的是陪審團制度，即指由特定人數的有選舉權的公民參與決定嫌犯是否起訴、是否有罪的制度。在陪審團制度的司法體制里，律師在法庭上首先也是最重要的受眾是陪審團成員，他們直接影響和決定審判的結果，是律師首先要激起共鳴和說服的對象;其次是法官，雖然法官無權干涉陪審團的判案結果，但他她在司法程序上是控制和引導者，也就是說在法庭上，陪審團負責裁定案件事實，法官負責如何適用法律。最后的受眾是旁聽者，其中包括數目有限的媒體報道者。雖然按照法律，他們只是旁聽和見證者，在庭審現場不得制造噪音，不得干擾庭審過程，但是他們及時的情緒情感反映也會微妙地影響著庭審現場中的控辯雙方、證人、陪審團和法官，甚至是庭審進程。

(二)法庭演說:“分隔論”和修辭的力量

伯克認為，與“同一論”相矛盾的是“分隔論”［4］。因為人們思想的不同，分隔提供了同一成為人類所需求的一種情景，使得同一和修辭具有目的。在法庭演說中，律師和受眾包括陪審團和法官之間存在分隔，所以其目的和任務就是要使用修辭來達到“一種殘余的、共同的折中方法，以此來消除派性，達到同體化和歸屬性”［5］，即在心理維度上達成一致，最終說服。對于“言”和“力”的關系，古希臘先師和當代哲辯思想家們普遍認為，詞語本身并沒有什么內在的價值和能力，但是一旦在具體的社會、文化、政治語境中得到應用，也就是說一旦從語言層面上升到修辭層面，就成為一種異乎尋常的力量［6］。從法庭唇槍舌劍般的辯論和演說中，“言”和“力”的關系得到了淋漓盡致的體現。法庭演說的修辭性策略正是為了達到與在場的法官、陪審員甚至是旁聽者等受眾的“同一”和說服的效果。本文擬從比較和類比、比喻、反問和重復四個主要手段來具體分析律師法庭演說的同一修辭策略在形式上的表現。

1.使用比較和類比

在法庭演說中，律師使用比較和類比的手法可以制造“同情同一”和“對比同一”的效果。“同情同一”的表現方式就是想對方之所想，憂人之憂，樂人之樂，正如英文單詞“sympathy”由“sym”和“pathy”兩部分構成，分別表示“相同”和“心理”一樣，“同情同一”即表達與受眾相同的心理和情感，律師在法庭上要將這種機制運用于演說之中并能被受眾領悟。以下例子的案件發生在種族歧視和偏見肆虐的美國南方某地，一個十一歲的黑人女孩被兩個白人青年用殘忍到令人發指的方式強暴并殺害。而審判地點設在白人多數區，陪審團成員和法官也都是白人，在各種因素對原告方不利的情況下，原告方代理律師在最后總結陳詞時發表如下演說:

Now，I had a great summation all worked out，full of some sharp lawyering，but I’m not doing it.I’m here to apologize.I am young，and I am inexperienced.But you cannot hold Carl Lee Hailey responsible for my shortcomings.You see，in all this legal maneuvering，something’s got lost.That something is the truth.What is it in us that seeks the truth?Is it our minds or is it our hearts?…… But we don’t know better.I want to tell you a story.I want to ask you to close your eyes while I tell you the story.I want you to listen to me.I want you to listen to yourselves.Go ahead.Close your eyes please.This is a story about a little girl，walking home from the grocery store one sunny afternoon.I want you to picture this girl.Suddenly a truck races up.Two men jump out and grab her.They drag her to a nearby field，and they tie her up.They rip her clothes from her body.And they climb on.First one，then the other，raping her，shattering everything innocent and pure，with a vicious thrust，in a fog of drunken breath and sweat，and when they’re done，after they’ve killed her tiny womb，murdered any chance for her to bear children，to have life beyond her own，they start to use her for target practice.So they start throwing full beer cans at her.They throw them so hard，that it tears the flesh all the way to her bones，then they urinate on her.Now comes the hanging.They have a rope.They tie a noose.Imagine the noose coiling tight around her neck，and a sudden blinding jerk，she’s pulled into the air and her feet go kicking.They don’t find the ground.The hanging branch isn’t strong enough.It snaps and she falls back to the earth.So they pick her up，throw her in the back of the truck，drive out to Foggy Creek Bridge，pitch her over the edge.And she drops some 30 feet，down to the creek bottom below.Can you see her?Her raped?Her beaten?Broken body?Soaked in their urine?Soaked in their semen，soaked in her blood，left to die.Can you see her?I want you to picture that little girl.Now imagine she is white.The defense rests.

在這一段演說中，律師首先用樸素的語言、坦誠的態度、真摯的情感打動人，所以最后當他要在場所有人都閉上眼睛聽他講故事的請求雖然令人感到意外，但大家都心甘情愿地閉上眼睛，聽他發自肺腑地講訴一個十一歲的黑人少女是如何被兩個白人青年殘忍地強暴和殺害的過程。在故事結尾處，他在長時間的因哽咽和泣不成聲的停頓之后，突然話鋒一轉，要在場的所有人想象受害者如果是一個白人女孩的情形，“I want you to picture that little girl.Now imagine she is white.”這句話如平地一聲驚雷，讓所有沉浸在悲痛中的陪審團成員和旁聽者都猛然睜開了眼睛，其中很多人已經淚流滿面，低聲抽泣。這一句話起到了運用“同情同一”所達到的最佳效果，也為原告律師贏得官司起到了關鍵的作用，修辭者真正像修辭受眾那樣所言、所思、所感、所為。另外，演講中還很好地運用了“無意識同一”策略。按照伯克的觀點，無意識同一讓“觀眾受到修辭文本的感染，感受到自己擁有同樣的權利和力量，賦予了同樣的特質和好處”［7］。演講中使用“We”，“our minds”，“our hearts”這樣的詞匯，要求“我們”追求真理是用“我們的心靈”而不是“我們的大腦”，體現了演講者與受眾者在認知心理、普世價值觀和情感價值觀的同一。因此，這兩種同一策略共同作用，使得結案陳詞演說充滿了人性的力量，為最終贏得官司起了決定性的作用。

再舉一例，此例的原告方律師代理當事人控告某生產銷售槍支彈藥的公司只為牟利，任由槍支在市場上泛濫以及持槍暴力的肆掠橫行，造成當事人家人無辜喪命。下面是原告方律師的開庭陳詞演說:

October，two years ago，at 8:45 a.m.on a Monday morning，a man by the name of Kevin Peltier casually walks into the brokerage house from which he was fired the previous Friday morning.He walks into the elevator，he loads a 36－round magazine into his Performa 990 semiautomatic，and when he reaches the third floor，he opens fire on his former coworkers，killing 11 and critically wounding five before turning the gun on himself.Now they never had a chance.This was all less than two minutes.They couldn’t stop him.Eleven lives ended.That’s all you jurors minus one.And among them was Jacob Wood，the husband of my client，Celeste Wood，and the father of their son Henry，6 years old.Now I don’t know about you，but I’m angry at the tragic and senseless loss of life.Why does the Vicksburg Firearms Company make it so easy to buy these guns on the underground market?Because they care more about making money than they do about your life，or my life or the life of that woman’s husband.A very courageous former executive of Vicksburg Firearms，he is gonna come here.He is gonna testify that this Performa 990 semiautomatic was manufactured for，principally，criminals，and all those others poised for violence，turning it into a very efficient mass murderer.Yes，it was Mr.Peltier that squeezed the trigger that awful morning，but it was the Vicksburg Firearms Company through a deliberate，negligent distribution policy，that put that assault－type weapon into the hands of Mr.Peltier.As such，they were complicit in those murders.This I’ll prove to you during the course of the trial.Thank you very much.

律師在此段演講中利用了“對立同一”的修辭策略。按認知心理學解釋，“對立同一”的基礎就是“公敵”，即修辭者和受眾擁有共同討厭、仇恨和反對的問題、人和事物，而在價值觀、利益、情感、信仰、認知等方面達到認同，正如契訶夫所說:愛、友誼和尊重都不能像某種共同的仇恨那樣把人團結在一起。演說者以講故事的方式開始開庭陳詞:一個被公司開除后的員工為發泄怨恨，荷槍實彈地來到公司，面對人群提槍掃射，瞬間11人殞命。為了描述事件的慘狀，演說者把11人這個數據跟陪審團12人數據進行對比:Eleven lives ended.That’s all you jurors minus one.這種手法很高明，因為原告律師的目的很清楚，陪審團才是最終決定官司輸贏的關鍵因素，如果陪審團被說服和打動了，產生對槍支泛濫的共同仇恨，案情審判就會朝有利于自己的方向發展而最終贏得官司。因此，這一句對比看似漫不經心，實則很有份量，體現了律師精明敏銳的職業素養，符合伯克“對立同一”的修辭策略。

2.使用比喻

首先，法律語言的使用必須建立在證據和邏輯推理基礎之上，講求直白、準確，使用比喻的修辭手段可能會造成含蓄委婉，甚至使用不當的比喻可能會造成不良的法律后果。其次是不恰當的比喻會適得其反，引火燒身，反而達不到目的，因此應該慎用比喻。然而這一事實不能妨礙我們在司法語言中創造性地使用語言，尤其是用比喻的方式來達到生動性和煽動性效果。功能語言學派倫敦學派的先驅費斯［8］說:“語言有一種自然傾向，在聲音、手勢、符號等等使用的后面存在強烈的愿望和動機?！笔褂眯揶o正是體現了這種目的—完成一種強烈的愿望和動機的表達。比喻手段以其豐富的聯想性、具體性和鮮明性表現出強大的語言藝術魅力。恰當使用比喻手段，可以把一些難以說明的事情或者復雜的情況，用一種生動，令人親切、熟悉、易懂的方式再現出來，從而取得良好的效果，在聽眾中間會造成強烈的情緒感染和認同效果。以下是一段公訴人的開庭演說:

Andrew Marsh made，what turned out to be，the fatal mistake:he fell in love.He fell in love with a ruthless，calculating woman who went after an elderly man with a bad heart and a big bank account.You all can see the defendant Rebecca Carlson.But as this trial proceeds，you will see she is not only the defendant，she is the murder weapon herself.If I hit you and you die，I am the cause of your death，but can I be called a weapon?The answer is yes.And what kind of weapon Rebecca Carlson has made of it?The State will prove that she seduced Andrew Marsh and manipulated his affections until he rewrote his will，leaving her 8 million dollars，that she insisted on increasingly strangling sex，knowing he had severe heart condition.And when that didn’t work faster enough for her，she secretly doped him with cocaine.His heart couldn’t take the combination，and she got what she wanted.

She is a beautiful woman，but when this trial is over，you will see her no differently than a gun or a knife or any other instruments used as a weapon.She is a killer，and the worst kind，a killer who disguised herself as a loving partner.

在這段演說中，公訴人控訴被告以戀愛為名謀殺他人，讓受害者更改遺囑以非法手段獲取巨額遺產。為了加強控訴的說服力，律師在兩處用了暗喻:“She is the murder weapon herself.”“no differently than a gun or a knife or any other instruments used as a weapon.”這兩句都帶有開庭陳述的總結性質，使結論更加堅定果斷。按照認知心理原理，這里的比喻實施了“對立同一”的策略，起到了煽動受眾對被告共同的恨和怨的效果。

3.使用修辭問句

修辭問句有反問和設問兩種，表現形式多樣，有的自問自答，有的問而不答，也有的甲問乙答。用修辭問句來強調某概念或突出某項內容，比一般的肯定或否定更有力量和氣勢，更令人信服。下例是某律師為當事人進行辯護的總結陳詞演說:

“Ladies and gentlemen，the State has charged these three men with a crime.And they supported that charge with the testimony of two witnesses.Sarah Tobias，who told you how three men raped her，and she heard other men shouting encouragement to her attackers.Did she name these other men?No.Did she describe these other men?No.Could she tell you what these other men shouted?No.Her sworn testimony－－her poignant，heart－rending sworn testimony－－was an appeal to your pity.And if her story is true，you should pity her.But even if her story is true and you do pity her that has nothing to do with this case，because those three men did not rape her.Her sworn testimony is nothing，and you must treat it as nothing.Now if you wish，you can also treat as nothing the testimony of her lover，Larry，who told you what kind of woman she is.And you can treat as nothing the testimony of the bartender，Jesse，who told you that she was so drunk，she could barely stand.And you can treat as nothing the testimony of her friend，Sally，who told you what Miss Tobia’s intentions were when she first saw our clients.Our case does not depend on those witnesses，just as the People’s case does not depend on Sarah Tobias’.The People’s case depends on Kenneth Joyce.If you believe him，you’ll convict those three men.And if you don’t，you’ll acquit them.Do you believe him?Why did Kenneth Joyce testify?Every day for months，he said to himself，“I’m guilty.”，“I’m guilty.”Finally he was offered a way to purge that guilt，and he took it.Kenneth Joyce told you he watched a rape and everyone else in that room watched a rape.How did he know that?Did he read their minds?To solicit a crime，you must first know that it is a crime.Who knew it?Kenneth Joyce.Do you think it matters to Kenneth Joyce who shouted? In his mind，every person in that room was guilty.He told you that.And Kenneth Joyce－－who is guilty，who did watch a rape and do nothing，will purge himself by bringing down anyone who was in that room.And of course，at no legal cost to himself，while those three men face prison.Do you believe him?If you do，convict him.And if you don’t，and I know you don’t，acquit.”

演說者共用了十個反問句和設問句，形成滔滔不絕、咄咄逼人、語氣強烈的氣勢，給受眾強烈的感情刺激和震撼，同時在價值、情感、認知、需要等心理因素處于同一維度，激發受眾者思考、判斷，從而打動和說服受眾。

4.使用重復排比

重復和排比是在法庭辯論和演說中常見的修辭手法，可以產生排炮連發、氣貫長虹、語氣酣暢的效果。以下一段是緊接著上例被告方律師總結陳詞后的演說，控方律師在法庭結案陳詞中為遭到強暴的女當事人進行辯護，控訴被告的演說:

“Ladies and gentlemen，Mr.Paulsen has told you the testimony of Sarah Tobias is nothing.Sarah Tobias was raped，but that is nothing.She was cut and bruised and terrorized，but that is nothing.All of it happened in front of a howling crowd，and that is nothing.Well，it may be nothing to Mr.Paulsen，but it is not nothing to Sarah Tobias.And I don’t believe it’s nothing to you.Next Mr.Paulsen tried to convince you Kenneth Joyce was the only person in that room who knew that Sarah Tobias was being raped，the only one.Now，you watched Kenneth Joyce，how did he strike you?Did he seem especially sensitive? Especially observant?Did he seem so remarkable that you immediately said to yourself，“Of course，this man would notice things other people wouldn’t.”Do you believe that Kenneth Joyce saw something those three men didn’t see?In all the time that Sarah Tobias was held down on that pinball machine，the others didn’t know?Kenneth Joyce confessed to you that he watched a rape and did nothing.He told you that everyone in that bar behaved badly，and he’s right.But no matter how immoral it may be，it is not the crime of criminal solicitation to walk away for a rape.It is not the crime of criminal solicitation to silently watch a rape.But it is the crime of criminal solicitation to induce，or entreat，or encourage or persuade another person to commit a rape.“Hold her down”，“stick it to her”，“make her moan”these three men did worse than nothing，they cheered，and they clapped，and they rooted the others on.They made sure that Sarah Tobias was raped，and raped，and raped.Now，you tell me，is that nothing?”

當對方辯護律師在演說中使用了“nothing”之后，控方律師抓住這個詞不放，以其人之道，還治其人之身，重復“nothing”達十次之多。他以“nothing”開頭，又以“nothing”結尾，首尾呼應，語調鏗鏘，一氣呵成，具有震撼人心的效果?！皀othing”在不同的句子中間隔出現，這種重復叫間隔重復，在中間插入了其他短語或句子，這樣相同的詞語反復又照應，使演說內容步步深入，達到說理透徹，中心突出，層次清晰，也增加了音律美，起到了一唱三嘆的作用，具有極強的感染力和說服力。同時十次重復的“nothing”也喚起了受眾者對受害者的同情，因此起到了“同情同一”效果。

三、結論

本文結合法庭演說的實例，闡釋了伯克的“同一”修辭理論及其三個策略，描述了該策略在演說中的表現形式，揭示了法庭演說作為一種符合目的原則的言語行為，其語言的修辭策略的選擇和手段帶有強烈的認同目的。有效的同一修辭策略的最高境界是語言形式和內容完美的和諧統一。而在法庭演說中，為達到同一修辭策略目的而使用的各種修辭手段可以表現豐富的內涵和情感，增強描述的生動性、論說的力度和可信度，同時讓受眾者認同其思維、情感和表達方式，在伯克看來，這是進行成功說服的必要條件。不過，正如高懸于美國法庭外墻上的一句話所說的:It is the spirit not the form of law that keeps justice alive.(捍衛正義的是法律的精神而不是法律的形式。)也正如美國著名律師克萊倫斯·丹諾所說:大多數律師所做的事情并不都是崇高的，只有當他們的正義感得到充分發揮的時候，才能使他的職業變得崇高。蘇格拉底也說過:除非把說明純粹真理叫做雄辯，我根本就不會雄辯。法庭絕非律師個人表現的講臺，一個律師使用的語言技巧無論多么炫目和感人，最后還是要靠事實和證據來昭示一切。

［1］XU，Q.G.The Use of Eloquence:the ConfucianPerspective［M］//Carol S.Lipson，Roberta A.Binkley.Rhetoric Before and Beyond the Greeks.New York:State University of New York Press，2004:214.

［2］鄧勇志.修辭理論與修辭哲學［M］.上海:學林出版社，2011:54.

［3］郭亨杰，宋月麗.心理語言學教程［M］.南京:南京師范大學出版社，1995:5.

［4］Burk，Kenneth.A Rhetoric of Motives［M］.New York: George Braziller，Inc.，1950:22

［5］胡曙中.西方新修辭學概論［M］.湘潭:湘潭大學出版社，2009:267.

［6］劉亞猛.西方修辭學史［M］.北京:外語教學與研究出版社，2008:298.

［7］廖美珍.目的原則與目的分析(上)［J］.修辭學習，2005，(3):33－34.

［8］林正.辯護的藝術［M］.北京:中國商業出版社，2009: 209.