法庭开庭和总结陈词英语演说中的“同一”修辞策略和表现手段

刘诺亚

(荆楚理工学院外国语学院，湖北荆门 448000)

一、“同一”修辞理论及其认知心理学原理

亚里士多德在《修辞学》中认为修辞是逻辑和政治的对等物，把它称作是一种调动一切可以调动的劝说手段［1］。他提出了演讲中劝说的三要素即逻辑诉诸、情感诉诸和人格诉诸(Logos，pathos and ethos)。在肯尼思·伯克的修辞体系中，“同一”的概念是其核心理论，根据伯克的观点，修辞是用符号(即语言)去诱发合作的行为，即修辞者要达到劝说的目的，必须与受众者实现“同一”(Identification)。一个人要么试图通过论辩来劝说其听众，他必须根据他们的思维方式来进行;通过情感，就必须具有在某种程度上指望听众能有的感情。“同一”在交际中的作用已经得到实验证明［2］，无论是诉诸逻辑、情感还是人格，其最终目的都是为了达到“同一”。这个概念的提出把古典修辞学(其核心是劝说)和新修辞学有机地结合起来并对劝说进行了补充，把在顺从和诉诸修辞中整个自觉的和不自觉的动机语言范围都包括了进去，成为新修辞学的关键词之一。从认知心理学来看，人在同一维度上的心理因素是:价值、态度、需要、信念、认知、情感、知识等等［3］，劝说的“认同”导致心理领域的这些因素的同一性，才能达到形成观点(态度)，改变观点(态度)或加强观点(态度)的目的。在伯克看来，这种“同一”一共有三种策略:同情同一(identification by sympathy)、对立同一(identification by antithesis)和无意识同一(identification by inaccuracy)。所谓“同情同一”，是指在思想、态度、情感、价值、等方面的相同或相似。所谓“对立同一”，是指修辞者与受众因为具有共同的问题、挑战、敌人而达到认同。所谓“无意识同一”是指修辞者使用某些手段如图片、或如类似“我们”的词语使受众无意识或潜意识地认同修辞者，想象自己成为修辞者或如修辞所描绘的那样。法庭是原告代理律师(或公诉人)和辩护律师展示自己的演说和辩论才能的舞台，是控辩双方律师的战场，而法庭辩论和演说是为了进一步阐述和巩固自己的观点和立场，驳斥和削弱对方的观点和立场，与陪审团和法官在以上提到的各个心理因素在心理维度上达到“同一”，最终达到说服陪审团和法官的目的。

二、法庭英语演说中认同策略的表现形式

(一)受众特点

在西方修辞学中，受众是指修辞者进行修辞说服从而达到其目的的对象，对受众的正确把握也是确保演讲成功的关键因素。在西方大多数国家里实行的是陪审团制度，即指由特定人数的有选举权的公民参与决定嫌犯是否起诉、是否有罪的制度。在陪审团制度的司法体制里，律师在法庭上首先也是最重要的受众是陪审团成员，他们直接影响和决定审判的结果，是律师首先要激起共鸣和说服的对象;其次是法官，虽然法官无权干涉陪审团的判案结果，但他她在司法程序上是控制和引导者，也就是说在法庭上，陪审团负责裁定案件事实，法官负责如何适用法律。最后的受众是旁听者，其中包括数目有限的媒体报道者。虽然按照法律，他们只是旁听和见证者，在庭审现场不得制造噪音，不得干扰庭审过程，但是他们及时的情绪情感反映也会微妙地影响着庭审现场中的控辩双方、证人、陪审团和法官，甚至是庭审进程。

(二)法庭演说:“分隔论”和修辞的力量

伯克认为，与“同一论”相矛盾的是“分隔论”［4］。因为人们思想的不同，分隔提供了同一成为人类所需求的一种情景，使得同一和修辞具有目的。在法庭演说中，律师和受众包括陪审团和法官之间存在分隔，所以其目的和任务就是要使用修辞来达到“一种残余的、共同的折中方法，以此来消除派性，达到同体化和归属性”［5］，即在心理维度上达成一致，最终说服。对于“言”和“力”的关系，古希腊先师和当代哲辩思想家们普遍认为，词语本身并没有什么内在的价值和能力，但是一旦在具体的社会、文化、政治语境中得到应用，也就是说一旦从语言层面上升到修辞层面，就成为一种异乎寻常的力量［6］。从法庭唇枪舌剑般的辩论和演说中，“言”和“力”的关系得到了淋漓尽致的体现。法庭演说的修辞性策略正是为了达到与在场的法官、陪审员甚至是旁听者等受众的“同一”和说服的效果。本文拟从比较和类比、比喻、反问和重复四个主要手段来具体分析律师法庭演说的同一修辞策略在形式上的表现。

1.使用比较和类比

在法庭演说中，律师使用比较和类比的手法可以制造“同情同一”和“对比同一”的效果。“同情同一”的表现方式就是想对方之所想，忧人之忧，乐人之乐，正如英文单词“sympathy”由“sym”和“pathy”两部分构成，分别表示“相同”和“心理”一样，“同情同一”即表达与受众相同的心理和情感，律师在法庭上要将这种机制运用于演说之中并能被受众领悟。以下例子的案件发生在种族歧视和偏见肆虐的美国南方某地，一个十一岁的黑人女孩被两个白人青年用残忍到令人发指的方式强暴并杀害。而审判地点设在白人多数区，陪审团成员和法官也都是白人，在各种因素对原告方不利的情况下，原告方代理律师在最后总结陈词时发表如下演说:

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.

在这一段演说中，律师首先用朴素的语言、坦诚的态度、真挚的情感打动人，所以最后当他要在场所有人都闭上眼睛听他讲故事的请求虽然令人感到意外，但大家都心甘情愿地闭上眼睛，听他发自肺腑地讲诉一个十一岁的黑人少女是如何被两个白人青年残忍地强暴和杀害的过程。在故事结尾处，他在长时间的因哽咽和泣不成声的停顿之后，突然话锋一转，要在场的所有人想象受害者如果是一个白人女孩的情形，“I want you to picture that little girl.Now imagine she is white.”这句话如平地一声惊雷，让所有沉浸在悲痛中的陪审团成员和旁听者都猛然睁开了眼睛，其中很多人已经泪流满面，低声抽泣。这一句话起到了运用“同情同一”所达到的最佳效果，也为原告律师赢得官司起到了关键的作用，修辞者真正像修辞受众那样所言、所思、所感、所为。另外，演讲中还很好地运用了“无意识同一”策略。按照伯克的观点，无意识同一让“观众受到修辞文本的感染，感受到自己拥有同样的权利和力量，赋予了同样的特质和好处”［7］。演讲中使用“We”，“our minds”，“our hearts”这样的词汇，要求“我们”追求真理是用“我们的心灵”而不是“我们的大脑”，体现了演讲者与受众者在认知心理、普世价值观和情感价值观的同一。因此，这两种同一策略共同作用，使得结案陈词演说充满了人性的力量，为最终赢得官司起了决定性的作用。

再举一例，此例的原告方律师代理当事人控告某生产销售枪支弹药的公司只为牟利，任由枪支在市场上泛滥以及持枪暴力的肆掠横行，造成当事人家人无辜丧命。下面是原告方律师的开庭陈词演说:

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.

律师在此段演讲中利用了“对立同一”的修辞策略。按认知心理学解释，“对立同一”的基础就是“公敌”，即修辞者和受众拥有共同讨厌、仇恨和反对的问题、人和事物，而在价值观、利益、情感、信仰、认知等方面达到认同，正如契诃夫所说:爱、友谊和尊重都不能像某种共同的仇恨那样把人团结在一起。演说者以讲故事的方式开始开庭陈词:一个被公司开除后的员工为发泄怨恨，荷枪实弹地来到公司，面对人群提枪扫射，瞬间11人殒命。为了描述事件的惨状，演说者把11人这个数据跟陪审团12人数据进行对比:Eleven lives ended.That’s all you jurors minus one.这种手法很高明，因为原告律师的目的很清楚，陪审团才是最终决定官司输赢的关键因素，如果陪审团被说服和打动了，产生对枪支泛滥的共同仇恨，案情审判就会朝有利于自己的方向发展而最终赢得官司。因此，这一句对比看似漫不经心，实则很有份量，体现了律师精明敏锐的职业素养，符合伯克“对立同一”的修辞策略。

2.使用比喻

首先，法律语言的使用必须建立在证据和逻辑推理基础之上，讲求直白、准确，使用比喻的修辞手段可能会造成含蓄委婉，甚至使用不当的比喻可能会造成不良的法律后果。其次是不恰当的比喻会适得其反，引火烧身，反而达不到目的，因此应该慎用比喻。然而这一事实不能妨碍我们在司法语言中创造性地使用语言，尤其是用比喻的方式来达到生动性和煽动性效果。功能语言学派伦敦学派的先驱费斯［8］说:“语言有一种自然倾向，在声音、手势、符号等等使用的后面存在强烈的愿望和动机。”使用修辞正是体现了这种目的—完成一种强烈的愿望和动机的表达。比喻手段以其丰富的联想性、具体性和鲜明性表现出强大的语言艺术魅力。恰当使用比喻手段，可以把一些难以说明的事情或者复杂的情况，用一种生动，令人亲切、熟悉、易懂的方式再现出来，从而取得良好的效果，在听众中间会造成强烈的情绪感染和认同效果。以下是一段公诉人的开庭演说:

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.

在这段演说中，公诉人控诉被告以恋爱为名谋杀他人，让受害者更改遗嘱以非法手段获取巨额遗产。为了加强控诉的说服力，律师在两处用了暗喻:“She is the murder weapon herself.”“no differently than a gun or a knife or any other instruments used as a weapon.”这两句都带有开庭陈述的总结性质，使结论更加坚定果断。按照认知心理原理，这里的比喻实施了“对立同一”的策略，起到了煽动受众对被告共同的恨和怨的效果。

3.使用修辞问句

修辞问句有反问和设问两种，表现形式多样，有的自问自答，有的问而不答，也有的甲问乙答。用修辞问句来强调某概念或突出某项内容，比一般的肯定或否定更有力量和气势，更令人信服。下例是某律师为当事人进行辩护的总结陈词演说:

“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.”

演说者共用了十个反问句和设问句，形成滔滔不绝、咄咄逼人、语气强烈的气势，给受众强烈的感情刺激和震撼，同时在价值、情感、认知、需要等心理因素处于同一维度，激发受众者思考、判断，从而打动和说服受众。

4.使用重复排比

重复和排比是在法庭辩论和演说中常见的修辞手法，可以产生排炮连发、气贯长虹、语气酣畅的效果。以下一段是紧接着上例被告方律师总结陈词后的演说，控方律师在法庭结案陈词中为遭到强暴的女当事人进行辩护，控诉被告的演说:

“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?”

当对方辩护律师在演说中使用了“nothing”之后，控方律师抓住这个词不放，以其人之道，还治其人之身，重复“nothing”达十次之多。他以“nothing”开头，又以“nothing”结尾，首尾呼应，语调铿锵，一气呵成，具有震撼人心的效果。“nothing”在不同的句子中间隔出现，这种重复叫间隔重复，在中间插入了其他短语或句子，这样相同的词语反复又照应，使演说内容步步深入，达到说理透彻，中心突出，层次清晰，也增加了音律美，起到了一唱三叹的作用，具有极强的感染力和说服力。同时十次重复的“nothing”也唤起了受众者对受害者的同情，因此起到了“同情同一”效果。

三、结论

本文结合法庭演说的实例，阐释了伯克的“同一”修辞理论及其三个策略，描述了该策略在演说中的表现形式，揭示了法庭演说作为一种符合目的原则的言语行为，其语言的修辞策略的选择和手段带有强烈的认同目的。有效的同一修辞策略的最高境界是语言形式和内容完美的和谐统一。而在法庭演说中，为达到同一修辞策略目的而使用的各种修辞手段可以表现丰富的内涵和情感，增强描述的生动性、论说的力度和可信度，同时让受众者认同其思维、情感和表达方式，在伯克看来，这是进行成功说服的必要条件。不过，正如高悬于美国法庭外墙上的一句话所说的:It is the spirit not the form of law that keeps justice alive.(捍卫正义的是法律的精神而不是法律的形式。)也正如美国著名律师克莱伦斯·丹诺所说:大多数律师所做的事情并不都是崇高的，只有当他们的正义感得到充分发挥的时候，才能使他的职业变得崇高。苏格拉底也说过:除非把说明纯粹真理叫做雄辩，我根本就不会雄辩。法庭绝非律师个人表现的讲台，一个律师使用的语言技巧无论多么炫目和感人，最后还是要靠事实和证据来昭示一切。

［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］邓勇志.修辞理论与修辞哲学［M］.上海:学林出版社，2011:54.

［3］郭亨杰，宋月丽.心理语言学教程［M］.南京:南京师范大学出版社，1995:5.

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

［5］胡曙中.西方新修辞学概论［M］.湘潭:湘潭大学出版社，2009:267.

［6］刘亚猛.西方修辞学史［M］.北京:外语教学与研究出版社，2008:298.

［7］廖美珍.目的原则与目的分析(上)［J］.修辞学习，2005，(3):33－34.

［8］林正.辩护的艺术［M］.北京:中国商业出版社，2009: 209.