Cover not available

Article In: Review of Cognitive Linguistics: Online-First Articles

A quantitative study of rhetorical dialogic constructions in courtroom dialogues

ORCiD logo with link | Sichuan International Studies University
 | Sichuan International Studies University
This content is being prepared for publication; it may be subject to changes.
Abstract
This study presents a quantitative analysis of rhetorical dialogic constructions and their resonance patterns in Chinese courtroom dialogues. The results show that yes-no rhetorical dialogic constructions tend to be associated with explicit pragmatic and redundant semantic resonance; specific and affirmative-negative rhetorical dialogic constructions display partial resonance across syntactic, semantic, and pragmatic dimensions; and alternative rhetorical dialogic constructions show associations with implicit resonance across all three dimensions. Further analysis of the cognitive mechanisms underlying these associations suggests that routinization, schematization, and repetition contribute to the resonance patterns. Building on these findings, an integrated model is proposed that links rhetorical dialogic construction types, resonance patterns, and their underlying cognitive mechanisms. This study reconceptualizes rhetorical questions as dynamic question-response pairs and establishes an empirically grounded framework for analyzing dialogic constructions. The findings provide theoretical and methodological insights into the study of dialogic constructions across other institutional and everyday interactional settings.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Literature review
    • 2.1Dialogic construction grammar
    • 2.2Previous studies on rhetorical dialogic constructions
  • 3.Methodology
    • 3.1Data extraction
    • 3.2Data annotation
      • 3.2.1Syntactic resonance
      • 3.2.2Semantic resonance
      • 3.2.3Pragmatic resonance
    • 3.3Statistical analysis
  • 4.Results and discussion
    • 4.1General description of resonance patterns across four types of rhetorical dialogic constructions
    • 4.2Resonance in different types of rhetorical dialogic constructions
      • 4.2.1Alternative rhetorical dialogic constructions
      • 4.2.2Yes-no rhetorical dialogic constructions
      • 4.2.3Specific and affirmative-negative rhetorical dialogic constructions
      • 4.2.4Interim summary
  • 5.Cognitive mechanisms underlying resonance patterns in different rhetorical dialogic constructions
    • 5.1Routinization in alternative rhetorical dialogic constructions
    • 5.2Schematization in yes-no rhetorical dialogic constructions
    • 5.3Repetition in specific and affirmative-negative rhetorical dialogic constructions
    • 5.4Interim summary
  • 6.Conclusion
  • Notes
  • Abbreviations
  • References
References (79)
References
Atkinson, John M., & Drew, Paul. (1979). Order in court: The organisation of verbal interaction in judicial settings. Macmillan. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bakhtin, Mikhail M. (1981). The dialogic imagination: Four essays (Michael Holquist, Ed.; Caryl Emerson & Michael Holquist, Trans.). University of Texas Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Biezma, María, & Rawlins, Kyle. (2017). Rhetorical questions: Severing questioning from asking. In Burgdorf, Dan, Jacob Collard, Sireemas Maspong & Brynhildur Stefánsdóttir (Eds.), Semantics and linguistic theory (SALT) 27 (pp. 302–322). Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bresnan, Joan, Cueni, Anna, Nikitina, Tatiana, & Baayen, Rolf H. (2007). Predicting the dative alternation. In Bouma, Gerlof, Irene M. Krämer & Joost Zwarts (Eds.), Cognitive foundations of interpretation (pp. 69–94). Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brône, Geert, & Zima, Elisabeth. (2014). Towards a dialogic construction grammar: Ad hoc routines and resonance activation. Cognitive Linguistics, 25(3), 457–495. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Caponigro, Ivano, & Sprouse, Jon. (2019). Rhetorical questions as questions. Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung, 11, 121–133. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chen, Haiqing, & Liu, Lele. (2017). The pragmatic functions and intonational features of positive and negative interrogatives in courtroom discourse: A study based on CCTV courtroom live videos. Journal of Chongqing University of Science and Technology (Social Science Edition), (6), 58–62. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chen, Qiaojing. (2021). A study on the subjectivity of choice questions in modern Chinese. Central China Normal University PhD Thesis.
Chen, Qianrui, Tantucci, Vittorio, & Chen, Ruoyu. (2025). Imperfective aspect in Chinese conversation: Do speakers imitate one another’s constructions? Cognitive Linguistics, 36(2), 299–334. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Clark, Herbert H. (1996). Using language. Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cotterill, Janet. (2003). Language and power in court: A linguistic analysis of the O.J. Simpson trial. Palgrave Macmillan. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Croft, William, & Cruse, D. Alan. (2004). Cognitive linguistics. Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dąbrowska, Ewa. (2014). Recycling utterances: A speaker’s guide to sentence processing. Cognitive Linguistics, 25(4), 617–653. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dingemanse, Mark. (2020). Resource-rationality beyond individual minds: The case of interactive language use. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 43, e9. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Divjak, Dagmar. (2010). Structuring the lexicon: A clustered model for near-synonymy. De Gruyter Mouton. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Drew, Paul, & Heritage, John. (1992). Analyzing talk at work: An introduction. In Drew, Paul & John Heritage (Eds.), Talk at work: Interaction in institutional settings (pp. 3–65). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Du Bois, John W. (2014). Towards a dialogic syntax. Cognitive Linguistics, 25(3), 359–410. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Du Bois, John W., & Giora, Rachel. (2014). From cognitive-functional linguistics to dialogic syntax. Cognitive Linguistics, 25(3), 351–357. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fillmore, Charles J. (1982). Frame semantics. In Linguistic Society of Korea (Ed.), Linguistics in the morning calm (pp. 111–138). Hanshin Publishing Company.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Garrod, Simon, & Pickering, Martin J. (2004). Why is conversation so easy? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8(1), 8–11. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Geka, Vassiliki, Marmaridou, Sophia, & Nikiforidou, Kiki. (2020). Dialogic constructions and discourse units: The case of THINK AGAIN. Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 18(2), 480–518. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gibbons, John. (2003). Forensic linguistics: An introduction to language in the justice system. Blackwell Publishers.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Giora, Rachel, Raphaely, Moshe, Fein, Ofer, & Livnat, Elad. (2014). Resonating with contextually inappropriate interpretations in production: The case of irony. Cognitive Linguistics, 25(3), 443–455. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Glynn, Dylan. (2014). Corpus methods and statistics for semantics. In Glynn, Dylan & Justyna A. Robinson (Eds.), Corpus methods for semantics: Quantitative studies in polysemy and synonymy (pp. 307–341). John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goldberg, Adele E. (1995). Constructions: A construction grammar approach to argument structure. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2006). Constructions at work: The nature of generalization in language. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Greenacre, Michael. (2007). Correspondence analysis in practice (2nd ed.). CRC Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gries, Stefan Th. (2007). Corpus-based methods and cognitive semantics: The many senses of to run. In Gries, Stefan Th. & Anatol Stefanowitsch (Eds.), Corpora in cognitive linguistics: Corpus-based approaches to syntax and lexis (pp. 57–100). De Gruyter Mouton. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Harris, Sandra. (1984). Questions as a mode of control in magistrates’ courts. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 49, 5–28. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Haselow, Alexander. (2024). Syntactic fragments in social interaction: A socio-cognitive approach to the syntax of conversation. English Language & Linguistics, 28(3), 521–551. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hautli-Janisz, Annette, Budzynska, Katarzyna, McKillop, Conor, Plüss, Brian, Gold, Valentin, & Reed, Chris. (2022). Questions in argumentative dialogue. Journal of Pragmatics, 188, 56–79. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Heffer, Chris. (2005). The language of jury trial: A corpus-aided analysis of legal-lay discourse. Palgrave Macmillan. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Heritage, John. (2002). The limits of questioning: Negative interrogatives and hostile question content. Journal of Pragmatics, 34(10–11), 1427–1446. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Heritage, John, & Clayman, Steven. (2010). Talk in action: Interactions, identities, and institutions. Wiley-Blackwell. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hopper, Paul J. (1987). Emergent grammar. Proceedings of the Thirteenth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, 13, 139–157. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2011). Emergent grammar and temporality in interactional linguistics. In Auer, Peter & Stefan Pfänder (Eds.), Constructions: Emerging and emergent (pp. 22–44). De Gruyter Mouton. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Koshik, Irene. (2002). A conversation analytic study of yes/no questions which convey reversed polarity assertions. Journal of Pragmatics, 34(12), 1851–1877. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Langacker, Ronald W. (2000). Grammar and conceptualization. Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lau, Helena Yan Ping, & Lee, Sophia Yat Mei. (2018). Information-seeking questions and rhetorical questions in emotion expressions. In Su, Qi, Jiun-Shiung Wu & Jia-Fei Hong (Eds.), Chinese Lexical Semantics. CLSW 2018 (Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 11173). Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Levinson, Stephen C. (1983). Pragmatics. Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Liao, Meizhen. (2003). Courtroom questions, responses and their interaction. Law Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. (2003). Dialogical tensions: On rommetveitian themes of minds, meanings, monologues and languages. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 10(3), 219–229. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. (2009). Grammatical constructions in dialogue. In Bergs, Alexander & Gabriele Diewald (Eds.), Contexts and constructions (pp. 97–110). John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Liu, Xingbing. (2024). Structural parallelism: Triggers of conceptual integration in dialogic resonance. Contemporary Rhetoric, (6), 44–53. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nenadic, Oleg, & Greenacre, Michael. (2007). Correspondence analysis in R, with two- and three-dimensional graphics: The ca package. Journal of Statistical Software, 20(3), 1–13. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nikiforidou, Kiki. (2025). Multimodality, conventionality and inheritance in dialogic constructions. In Nikiforidou, Kiki & Mirjam Fried (Eds.), Multimodal communication from a Construction Grammar perspective (pp. 38–68). John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nikiforidou, Kiki, Marmaridou, Sophia, & Mikros, George K. (2014). What’s in a dialogic construction? A constructional approach to polysemy and the grammar of challenge. Cognitive Linguistics, 25(4), 655–699. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Paradis, Carita, & Willners, Caroline. (2011). Antonymy: From convention to meaning-making. Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 9(2), 367–391. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pichler, Heike. (2009). The functional and social reality of discourse variants in a northern English dialect: I DON’T KNOW and I DON’T THINK compared. Intercultural Pragmatics, 6(4), 561–596. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Quirk, Randolph, Greenbaum, Sidney, Leech, Geoffrey, & Svartvik, Jan. (1985). A comprehensive grammar of the English language. Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rohde, Hannah. (2006). Rhetorical questions as redundant interrogatives. San Diego Linguistics Papers, 2, 134–168.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sadock, Jerrold M. (1971). Queclaratives. In Li, Charles N. (Ed.), Papers from the seventh regional meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society (pp. 223–232). Chicago Linguistic Society.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel A. (2007). Sequence organization in interaction: A primer in conversation analysis. Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schmid, Hans-Jörg. (2018). Unifying entrenched tokens and schematized types as routinized commonalities of linguistic experience. Yearbook of the German Cognitive Linguistics Association, 6(1), 167–182. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Shen, Yanping. (2023). A study of the metonymic inferencing mechanism of dialogic syntactic resonance. Journal of Beijing International Studies University, 45(3), 136–150.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stefanowitsch, Anatol, & Gries, Stefan Th. (2003). Collostructions: Investigating the interaction of words and constructions. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 8(2), 209–243. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tannen, Deborah. (1987). Repetition in conversation: Toward a poetics of talk. Language, 63(3), 574–605. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tantucci, Vittorio, Culpeper, Jonathan V., & Di Cristofaro, Matteo. (2018). Dynamic resonance and social reciprocity in language change: The case of Good morrow. Language Sciences, 68, 6–21. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tantucci, Vittorio, & Lepadat, Carmen. (2024). Verbal engagement in doctor-patient interaction: Resonance in Western and traditional Chinese medicine. Journal of Pragmatics, 230, 126–141. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tantucci, Vittorio, & Wang, Aiqing. (2021). Resonance and engagement through (dis-)agreement: Evidence of persistent constructional priming from Mandarin naturalistic interaction. Journal of Pragmatics, 175, 94–111. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. (2023). Dialogic priming and dynamic resonance in autism: Creativity competing with engagement in Chinese children with ASD. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 53(6), 2458–2474. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tsui, Amy B. M. (1991). The pragmatic functions of I don’t know. Text, 11(4), 607–622. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
van de Weijer, Joost, Paradis, Carita, Willners, Caroline, & Lindgren, Magnus. (2014). Antonym canonicity: Temporal and contextual manipulations. Brain and Language, 128(1), 1–8. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wang, Deliang. (2018). On the resonance in dialogic syntax. Contemporary Linguistics, 20(2), 214–229.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wang, Yin, & Zeng, Guocai. (2016). An analysis by dialogic syntax of WH-question and answer construction: The first paper on this construction. Foreign Languages and Their Teaching, (1), 50–57. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wu, Shuqiong, & Liu, Dilin. (2020). Quantitative corpus methods for lexical semantic studies: Behavioral profile analysis. English Studies, 11, 153–164.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wu, Shuqiong, & Qiu, Huan. (2019). An analysis of police interrogation based on dialogic syntax theory. Journal of Zhejiang International Studies University, (1), 79–87.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Yin, Shulin. (2006). A study of rhetorical questions in modern Chinese. Fujian Normal University PhD Thesis.
Yuan, Weiguo. (2020). An analysis of the rhetorical-question dialogic syntactic construction in modern Chinese language based on the EAF model. Sichuan International Studies University PhD Thesis.
Zeng, Guocai. (2019). Dialogic construction grammar: A theoretical framework and its application. Sichuan University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. (2022). The emergence of dialogic constructions in conversation: A case study based on repetitions in Mandarin-speaking children’s utterances. Journal of Zhejiang International Studies University, (1), 50–57.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zhang, Dong. (2025). A multivariate analysis of English passive construction alternation using corpus-based probabilistic models. Foreign Language Education, 46(1), 34–40. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 jbe-platform.quadraat-sans-bold jbe-platform.quadraat-sans-bold-dark jbe-platform.quadraat-sans-bold-light jbe-platform.quadraat-sans-bold prag Twitter_Logo_Blue