Linguistic Diglossia in Iraqi Judicial Investigation Records: ASociopragmatic Approach.

Abstract

Levels of spoken language vary within communicative systems, a phenomenon known as linguistic multiplicity. This implies the coexistence of two distinct linguistic varieties: the "High" variety (Modern Standard Arabic) and the "Low" variety (Colloquial/Dialect), each possessing an independent structure. Diglossia manifests prominently in judicial language as a medium of communication between the investigating judge and the parties involved in the interrogation process—an interaction characterized by a reciprocal exchange of roles as prescribed by law, evidenced in the description of criminal tools, suspects, and their actions.

This research aims to explore the phenomenon of Diglossia within Iraqi judicial investigation records, where Standard Arabic (the language of official documentation) coexists with the colloquial dialect (the language of testimony and reality) within a specific situational context. The study addresses the structural and semantic discrepancies between the oral statements made by the parties involved and the formal linguistic mold employed by the investigating judge in official records.

By adopting a Sociopragmatic Approach, the research analyzes speech acts and the situational context of criminal evidence and descriptions of perpetrators. This is done to determine the extent to which this diglossia impacts the accuracy of legal characterization and judicial decision-making. The study concludes that diglossia in judicial language is a procedural necessity aimed at achieving "psychological honesty" and "descriptive precision," functioning as an effective pragmatic bridge between the authority of law and the reality of society.