Parametric Triangulation in Forensic Linguistic Expertise: on the Example of Insult

The article presents the theoretical substantiation of the author’s methodology for conducting a forensic linguistic examination of the text - parametric triangulation. Its essence is to attract to the previously verified method of parameterization the principles of triangulation - the use of several methods to solve one problem, as well as several sources when working with dictionaries and reference publications. The developed technique includes three consistent aspects of expert work: 1) the establishment of the parameters of identification of the offense committed in a verbal way; 2) determination of the list of methods and algorithm for studying language material in order to establish the compliance of its characteristics to the specified parameters; 3) quantitative-qualitative assessment of the results of the research. Practical issues of using the proposed methodology are considered in detail on the example of an expertise of speech activity products containing signs of insult. It has been established that based on the definition recorded in the Belarusian legislation, the insult is identified by the parameters of attributivity (status decrease in the image of the object of speech influence), non-normativity (the use of linguistic units related to the vocabulary as a part of the attributive constructions of the vocabulary) and deliberateness (In expert practice, most often replaced by factology), i.e., presence of intention to create a negative image of the victim. The conclusion on whether the conflictogenic text corresponds to one of the parameters is drawn from the results obtained through application of several methods: logical-and-semantic, lexiscentric and comparative analyses to identify attributivity; lexical, stylistic and genre analyses to identify non-normativity; syntactic, pragmalinguistic and contextual analyses to identify deliberateness (factology).Examples of the study of actual material are presented, including texts from the author’s practice of conducting judicial linguistic research. The relevance of the proposed methodology is proved by the achievement of a positive effect in the leveling of the possible subjectivity of expert conclusions and an increase in their level of visibility, as well as minimizing the assumption of inaccuracies in the conclusion of a specialist.