◊✲ࣀ࣮ࢺ᪥ᮏேドேᑜၥ࡟࠾ࡅࡿἲᘐ㏻ヂ㸸ࡑࡢㄢ㢟࡜ᑐᛂ⟇ẟࠉ฼ࠉ㞞ࠉᏊ㸦༡ᒣ኱Ꮫ㸧㸯㸬ࡣࡌࡵ࡟ࠉ㸰㸮ୡ⣖ᚋ༙௨㝆ࡢ㣕㌍ⓗ࡞ᢏ⾡ࡢ㐍Ṍ࡟ࡼࡾࠊࣄࢺࠊࣔࣀࠊ࢝ࢿࡢ⛣ືࡀຍ㏿ࡋࠊୡ⏺ࡢࢢ࣮ࣟࣂࣝ໬ࡀ㐍ࢇ࡛࠸ࡿࠊࡋ࠿ࡋࠊࡑࢀࡣỴࡋ࡚Ⰻ࠸㠃ࡔࡅࢆࡶࡓࡽࡋ࡚࠸ࡿࢃ
ࡅ࡛ࡣ࡞࠸ࠋFairclough(1989/2001) ࡀࠊ“Globalization is a real but incomplete process
which benets some people and hurts others.”(207) ࡜㏙࡭࡚࠸ࡿ࡜࠾ࡾ࡛࠶ࡿࠋ
ࠉ᪥ᮏࡶ౛እ࡛ࡣ࡞࠸ࠋ㏆ᖺࠊ᪥ᮏࡢࢢ࣮ࣟࣂࣝ໬࡜ඹ࡟ࣄࢺࡢ⛣ືࡶቑຍࡋ࡚࠸ࡿࠋ௒ᚋࠊ᭦࡞ࡿࢢ࣮ࣟࣂࣜࢮ࣮ࢩࣙࣥ࡟క࠸ࠊ᮶᪥እᅜேࡢᩘࡀ኱ࡁࡃῶᑡࡍࡿ࡜ࡣ᝿ീ࡛ࡁ࡞࠸ࠋ᮶᪥እᅜேࡢቑຍࡀ༶ࡕእᅜே≢⨥ࡢቑຍ࡟ࡣ⧅ࡀࡿ࡜ࡣゝ࠼࡞࠸ࡀࠊᐇ㝿࡟᪥ᮏ࡛Ⓨ⏕ࡍࡿ≢⨥ࡶࢢ࣮ࣟࣂࣝ໬ࡋ࡚࠸ࡿࠋἲົ┬≢⨥ⓑ᭩㸦ᖹᡂ 21 ᖺᗘ∧㸧࡟ࡼࡿ࡜ࠊእᅜே࡟ࡼࡿ୍⯡ฮἲ≢ࡢ᳨ᣲ௳ᩘࡣᖹᡂ  ᖺ࠿ࡽቑຍࡋࠊ ᖺ࡟㐣ཤ᭱ከࡢ㸲୓  ௳ࢆグ㘓ࡋࡓᚋࠊ ᖺ࠿ࡽῶᑡ࡟㌿ࡌࠊ ᖺࡣ㸱୓  ௳㸦๓ᖺẚ  ௳㸦㸣㸧ῶ㸧࡛࠶ࡗࡓࠋ᳨ᣲேဨࡣࠊ ᖺ࠿ࡽቑຍࡋࠊ ᖺ࡟㐣ཤ᭱ከࡢ㸯୓  ே࡜࡞ࡗࡓᚋࠊ ᖺ࠿ࡽῶᑡ࡟㌿ࡌࠊ ᖺࡣ㸯୓  ே㸦ྠ  ே㸦㸣㸧ῶ㸧࡛࠶ࡗࡓࠋከᑡࡢቑῶࡣ࠶ࡿࡶࡢࡢࠊࡇࢀࡽ஦౛ࡢࡼ࠺࡟እᅜேࡀ㛵ಀࡍࡿ≢⨥ቑຍ࡟క࠸ࠊᙜ↛ࡢࡇ࡜࡞ࡀࡽ᪥ᮏㄒࢆゎࡉ࡞࠸⿕␲⪅ࡶቑຍࡋ࡚࠸ࡿࠋࡑࢀࡽ⿕␲⪅ࡀ㛵ࢃࡗࡓ஦௳ࡢᤚᰝ࠾ࡼࡧබุ࡟ࡣࠊᚲࡎ㏻ヂ⪅ࡀᚲせ࡜࡞ࡿࠋࡘࡲࡾࠊ㆙ᐹ࡟ࡼࡿᤚᰝ࣭㐊ᤕ࠿ࡽ᳨ᐹ࡟ࡼࡿ㉳ッࠊࡑࡋ࡚බุࠊᑂ⌮ࠊࡲࡓุỴ࣭ฮࡢ☜ᐃ࡟⮳ࡿࡲ࡛ࡢ἞Ᏻ࣭ྖἲࣉࣟࢭࢫࡢࠊࡍ࡭࡚ࡢẁ㝵࡛㏻ヂࡀᚲせ࡜࡞ࡗ࡚ࡁ࡚࠸ࡿࡇ࡜ࢆព࿡ࡍࡿࠋࡇࢀࡽࢆ⥲⛠ࡋ࡚ྖἲ㏻ヂே࡜࠸࠺ࠋࠉࡇࡢࡼ࠺࡞ࢢ࣮ࣟࣂࣜࢮ࣮ࢩࣙࣥࡢὶࢀࡢ୰࡛ࠊእᅜேࡀ⿕࿌ே࡜࡞ࡿබุࡢᩘࡶቑ࠼
࡚࠸ࡿࠋእᅜேࡀ⿕࿌ேࡢሙྜ࡛࠶ࡗ࡚ࡶබุࡣ᪥ᮏㄒ࡛⾜ࢃࢀࡿࡓࡵࠊ⿕࿌ேࡀබุᡭ
⥆ࡁࢆ⌮ゎฟ᮶ࡿࡼ࠺࡟ἲᘐ㏻ヂேࡀ௜ࡅࡽࢀࡿࠋࡋ࠿ࡋࠊἲᘐ㏻ヂேࡣ⿕࿌ேᮏே࡜ࡢ㉁␲ᛂ⟅㸦ேᐃ㉁ၥ࣭⿕࿌ே㉁ၥ㸧ࡢࡳ࡟㏻ヂࡀᚲせ࡞ࡔࡅ࡛ࡣ࡞࠸ࠋ⿕࿌ேࡣබุࡢෆ
ᐜ඲࡚ࢆ⌮ゎࡍࡿᚲせࡀ࠶ࡿࡓࡵࠊ⿕࿌ே⮬㌟ࡀ⟅࠼ࡿᚲせࡢ࡞࠸㒊ศ࡟ࡘ࠸࡚ࡶ඲࡚⿕࿌ேࡢẕㄒ࠶ࡿ࠸ࡣእᅜㄒ࡟㏻ヂࡍࡿᚲせࡀ࠶ࡿࠋ౛࠼ࡤࠊἲᘐཧ୚⪅㸦⿢ุᐁࠊ᳨ᐹᐁࠊ
ᘚㆤே㸧࡜᪥ᮏேドே࡜ࡢ㛫ࡢドேᑜၥࡀࡑࡢ㸯ࡘ࡛࠶ࡿࠋ
ࠉ᪥ᮏேྠኈࡀཧ୚ࡍࡿᑜၥࡣẕᅜㄒྠኈࡢࡸࡾྲྀࡾࡢࡓࡵࠊ᪥ᮏேྠኈࡢ᭕᫕࡞Ⓨヰࡀ⏕ࡌࡿࡇ࡜ࡀ࠶ࡾࠊ᭦࡟ࡣ඲࡚ࡢⓎヰࡀドᣐ࡜࡞ࡿබุ࡜࠸࠺≉Ṧ࡞≧ἣ࠿ࡽ㉁ၥ࡜ᅇ⟅ࡀ࠿ࡳྜࢃ࡞࠿ࡗࡓࡾࠊゝ㉁ࢆྲྀࡽࢀ࡞࠸ࡼ࠺᩿ゝࢆ㑊ࡅࡼ࠺࡜ࡍࡿᅇ⟅ࡀ⏕ࡌࡓࡾࡍࡿࠋ
 ࠎ࡟ࡋ࡚㏻ヂࡀධࡿ࡜࠸࠺๓ᥦࡀⓎヰ⪅ࡢㄆ㆑࠿ࡽᢤࡅⴠࡕࡸࡍ࠸ࡢ࡛࠶ࡿࠋ
ࠉᮏㄽࡣࠊእᅜேࡀ⿕࿌ே࡛࠶ࡾࠊࡑࡢ௚ࡢἲᘐ㛵ಀ⪅ࡀ඲࡚᪥ᮏே࡛࠶ࡿሙྜࠊᑦୟࡘ
እᅜே⿕࿌ேࡀⓎヰࡋ࡞࠸㒊ศࡢ㏻ヂୖࡢㄢ㢟ࢆࠊ᪥ᮏேドேᑜၥ㸦᳨ᐹഃドேࠊ᝟≧ドே㸧ࢆ౛࡟ㄽࡌࡿࡶࡢ࡛࠶ࡿࠋドேᑜၥ౛ࡣࠊ➹⪅ࡀᐇ㝿࡟ἲᘐ㏻ヂேࢆົࡵࡓබุ࡛ࡢㄯヰࢆඖ࡟ࡋࡓࡶࡢ࡛࠶ࡿࡀࠊಶே᝟ሗࢆఅࡏᏲ⛎⩏ົࢆ㑂Ᏺࡋ࡚࠸ࡿࡇ࡜ࡣゝ࠺ࡲ࡛ࡶ࡞࠸ࠋ

ẟࠉ฼ࠉ㞞ࠉᏊ㸰㸬ࢥ࣑ࣗࢽࢣ࣮ࢩࣙࣥ⌮ㄽ࠿ࡽࡳࡿἲᘐ㏻ヂேࠉእᅜே⿕࿌ேࡀ᪥ᮏ࡛⿢࠿ࢀࡿሙྜ࡛࠶ࡗ࡚ࡶࠊฮ஦ッゴἲ࡟ࡼࡾ⿢ุᡤ࡛ࡢ୺యゝㄒࡣ᪥ᮏㄒ࡜࡞ࡿࠋࡑࡢሙྜࠊእᅜே⿕࿌ே࡟ࡣἲᘐ㏻ヂேࡀ௜ࡅࡽࢀࡿࠋ㏻ヂே࡟ࡼࡾࠊ⿕࿌ேࡀ᪥ᮏㄒࢆゎࡉ࡞࠸እᅜே࡛࠶ࡗ࡚ࡶࠊᑂ⌮ࢆ⌮ゎࡍࡿࡇ࡜ࡀྍ⬟࡟࡞ࡿࠋࠉ᪥ᮏࡢἲᘐ࡜ࡣࠊ⿢ࡃഃ࡛࠶ࡿ᪥ᮏㄒ୺యࡢἲᘐཧ୚⪅࡜࠸࠺ᶒຊ⪅࡜ࠊ⿢࠿ࢀࡿഃ࡛࠶ࡿእᅜㄒ୺యࡢእᅜே⿕࿌ே࡜࠸࠺㠀ᶒຊ⪅ഃ࡜࠸࠺ᵓᅗࡀ᭱ึ࠿ࡽᏑᅾࡋࠊࡇࡢ⎔ቃࡀそࡿࡇ࡜ࡣ࡞࠸ࠋᶒຊ࡜ゝㄒ㐠⏝ࡀ⤖ࡧࡘࡁࠊྠ᫬࡟ゝㄒ࡜ᐦ᥋࡟㛵ಀࡍࡿᩥ໬࡟ࡶᶒ
ຊᵓ㐀ࡀᏑᅾࡍࡿ≧ἣ࡟࡞ࡗ࡚࠸ࡿࠋ
Gallois, Ogay & Giles (2005) ࡽࡢ Communication Accommodation Theory(CAT) ࡣࠊࢥ࣑ࣗࢽࢣ࣮ࢩࣙࣥࢆ௨ୗࡢࡼ࠺࡟ㄝ᫂ࡍࡿࠋ
Communication never occurs in a vacuum, but within a sociohistorical context. Theinuence of context on communication operates at two levels: a direct inuence
through the opportunities for intergroup contact that are provided, and, more
important for CAT, an indirect inuence by means of interactants’ perceptions of thecontext. A range of macro-level factors delineates the intergroup power congurationreected in the interaction. (136)
ࡇࡇ࡛㏙࡭ࡽࢀ࡚࠸ࡿࡼ࠺࡟ࠊ♫఍Ṕྐⓗࢥࣥࢸࢡࢫࢺࡢ୰࡛⏕ࡌࠊ᭦࡟Ⓨヰ⪅࡜ཷᐜ⪅ࡢࢢ࣮ࣝࣉࡀᏑᅾࡋࠊࢥ࣑ࣗࢽࢣ࣮ࢩࣙࣥ࠿ࡽཷࡅࡿᙳ㡪ࡀ඲ࡃ␗࡞ࡾࠊࢥࣥࢸࢡࢫࢺࡢㄆ▱࡜࠸࠺ᡭẁ࡛㛫᥋ⓗ࡞ᙳ㡪ࡀ୍ᇽ࡟఍ࡋ࡚࠸ࡿ≧ែࡀࡲࡉ࡟ἲᘐ࡛࠶ࡿࠋࡋ࠿ࡋࠊእᅜேࡀ⿕࿌ேࡢሙྜࡢἲᘐ࡛ࡣ඲ཧ୚⪅ࡀྠࡌゝㄒࢆ౑⏝ࡋ࡚࠸ࡿࢃࡅ࡛ࡣ࡞࠸ࡓࡵࠊㄯヰࡢ⌮ゎ࣭ཷᐜ࡟ࡣἲᘐ㏻ヂேࡀ㛵୚ࡍࡿࡇ࡜࡟࡞ࡿࠋࡘࡲࡾࠊㄯヰཧ୚⪅ࡢⓎヰࢥࣥࢸࢡࢫࢺཷᐜ࡟ᑐࡋࠊ㛫᥋ⓗ࡟ᙳ㡪ࢆ୚࠼ࡿࡢࡣἲᘐ㏻ヂே࡟࡞ࡿࠋࡲࡓࠊAccommodation is the process through which interactants regulate theircommunication (adopting a particular linguistic code or accent, increasing ordecreasing their speech rate, avoiding or increasing eye contact, etc.) in order toappear more like (accommodation) or distinct from each other (nonaccommodation,including counter-accommodation through divergent or hostile moves,underaccommodation through maintenance and unempathetic moves, and overaccommodation through oftentimes patronizing or ingratiating moves). (137)
࡜㏙࡭࡚࠸ࡿࠋࡘࡲࡾㄪᩚ࡜ࡣࠊㄯヰཧຍ⪅ࡀ࠾஫࠸ዲࡲࡋ࠸㊥㞳࡟࠶ࡿࡢ࠿ࠊࡶࡋࡃࡣᩛᑐࡍࡿࡼ࠺࡞❧ሙ࡟࠶ࡿࡢ࠿ࢆ᫂ࡽ࠿࡟ࡍࡿࡓࡵࠊゝㄒ௨እࡢࡶࡢࡶ㏻ࡋ࡚ࢥ࣑ࣗࢽࢣ
࣮ࢩࣙࣥࢆつไࡍࡿࣉࣟࢭࢫ࡛࠶ࡿ࡜ࡋ࡚࠸ࡿࠋࡋ࠿ࡋࠊཧຍ⪅ྠኈࡀྠ୍ゝㄒࢆ౑⏝ࡋ࡚࠸ࢀࡤࠊఱࡢ㞀ቨࡶ࡞ࡃㄪᩚࡀ⾜ࢃࢀࡿࡀࠊྠ୍ゝㄒࡀ౑⏝ࡉࢀ࡚࠸ࡿࢃࡅ࡛ࡣ࡞࠸୰࡛ࢥ࣑ࣗࢽࢣ࣮ࢩࣙࣥࢆㄪᩚࡍࡿ࡟ࡣࠊゝⴥእࡢព࿡ࢆఏ࠼ࡿ㏻ヂࡀᚲせ࡛࠶ࡿࠋࡇࢀࢆἲᘐ࡟ᙜ࡚ࡣࡵ࡚ࡳࢀࡤࠊࡇࡢㄪᩚࢆ⾜࠺ࡢࡣ⤖ᒁࡢ࡜ࡇࢁἲᘐ㏻ヂே௨እ࡟࡞࠸ࠋゝㄒ࡜ᩥ໬ࡣᐦ᥋࡟㛵㐃ࡋ࡚࠸ࡿࡇ࡜ࢆ㚷ࡳࢀࡤࠊᩥ໬ⓗ⫼ᬒࢆకࢃ࡞࠸㏻ヂࡣ࠶ࡾᚓ࡞࠸࡜᪥ᮏேドேᑜၥ࡟࠾ࡅࡿἲᘐ㏻ヂ㸸ࡑࡢㄢ㢟࡜ᑐᛂ⟇ࡶゝ࠼ࡿࠋࡇࢀࢆ Hatim and Mason(1990) ࡣ௨ୗࡢࡼ࠺࡟ゝཬࡋ࡚࠸ࡿࠋ
The assumptions, presuppositions and conventions that surround discourse reect
the ways in which a given culture constructs and partitions reality. Any given
language is bound to express this partitioning in its own way. By the same token,transfer of meanings from one cultural system to another involves a contextual
dimension which manages our understanding of the way cultures work in terms ofother communicative and pragmatic features. (67)ࡲࡓࠊFairclough(1989/2001) ࡣࠊᶒຊഃ㸦Ỵᐃᶒࢆᣢࡘഃ㸧࡜㠀ᶒຊഃ㸦ఱ࠿ࢆỴᐃࡉࢀࡿഃ㸧ࡢᒓࡍࡿᩥ໬ࡀ␗࡞ࡾࠊࡋ࠿ࡶᶒຊ⪅ഃࡀᨭ㓄ⓗᩥ໬ࢢ࣮ࣝࣉ࡟ᒓࡍࡿሙ㠃ࠊලయⓗ࡟ࡣ⫋ሙ㠃᥋࡞࡝ࡢ౛ࢆࢤ࣮ࢺ࣮࢟ࣆࣥࢢࠊࡶࡋࡃࡣࢤ࣮ࢺ࣮࢟ࣃ࣮ⓗฟ఍࠸࡜ࡋ࡚ゐࢀ࡚࠸ࡿࠋ
What about unequal encounters where the non-powerful people have cultural andlinguistic backgrounds different from those of the powerful people? This is common
for instance in ‘gatekeeping encounters’ – encounters such as job interview in which a‘gatekeeper’ who generally belongs to the societally dominant cultural grouping
controls an encounter which determines whether someone gets a job, or gets access tosome other valued objective. (40)ࡇࡢࢤ࣮ࢺ࣮࢟ࣃ࣮ⓗᙺ๭࡟ࡘ࠸࡚ࡣࠊWadensjö(1998) ࡶゐࢀ࡚࠾ࡾࠊࢤ࣮ࢺ࣮࢟ࣃ࣮ⓗᙺ๭ࡀ 2 㔜࡜࡞ࡿሙ㠃ࠊࡘࡲࡾ㏻ヂࢆ௓ࡋࡓ఍ヰ࡟࠾࠸࡚࡝ࡢࡼ࠺࡟ᩥ໬࣭ゝㄒᕪ࡜ᶒຊࡢ᭷↓ࡀゝㄒ࡟ᙳ㡪ࢆ୚࠼ࡿࡢ࠿ࠊࡉࡽ࡟᳨ドࡀᚲせࡔ࡜ࡋ࡚࠸ࡿࠋ
It largely remains to be investigated how this conict is handled in institutional
interpreter-mediated talk, where the gatekeeping is, in effect, doubled. (69)ࠉᩥ໬࡜ゝㄒࡢ㛵ಀ࡟ࡘ࠸࡚ࡣࠊࢭࣞࢫࢥࣦ࢕ࢵࢳ (2009) ࡀࡑࡢ㏻ヂ⌮ㄽࡢ୰࡛ࠕࢥ࣑ࣗࢽࢣ࣮ࢩࣙࣥࡢ㞀ቨࡣ࡯࡜ࢇ࡝࡞ࡃ࡞ࡗ࡚ࡶࠊே㛫ࡀ஌ࡾ㉺࠼ࡽࢀࡎ࡟࠸ࡿࡢࡣゝㄒࡢ㞀
ቨࠖ(3) ࡔ࡜ㄽࡌ࡚࠸ࡿࠋࡑࡢࡓࡵゝㄒࡀቨ࡟࡞ࡿ࡜ᛮࢃࢀࡿሙ㠃࡟ࡣᚲࡎ࡜ゝࡗ࡚࠸࠸ࠕࢫࣆ࣮ࢳࡢㄒྃࢆᶵᲔⓗ࡟⨨ࡁ᥮࠼ࡿ
࡯࡝㏻ヂ⪅ࡀᏑᅾࡍࡿࠋࡲࡓࠊ㏻ヂ⪅ࡢᙺ๭ࡣࠊ
ࡢ࡛ࡣ࡞ࡃࠊ⌮ゎࡍࡿࡇ࡜࡛࠶ࡿࠖ(55-56㸧࡜ࡋ࡚࠸ࡿࠋࡘࡲࡾࠊ
ࠕ㏻ヂࡢศ㔝ࡣࢥ࣑ࣗࢽࢣ࣮ࢩ࡛ࣙࣥ࠶ࡾࠊⓎゝ⪅ࡢ࣓ࢵࢭ࣮ࢪࢆศᯒࡋࠊ⪺ࡁᡭ࡟ศ࠿ࡾࡸࡍ࠸ᙧ࡛⾲⌧ࡍࡿࡇ࡜ࠖ(9㸧࡛࠶ࡾࠊࠕᖖ࡟ヰࡋᡭࡢⓎゝࢆ⪺ࡁᡭ࡟⌮ゎࡉࡏࡼ࠺࡜ດࡵࠊࡑࡢࡲࡲヂࡏ࡞
㸦108㸧ࡶࡢ࡛࠶ࡾࠊࡉࡽ࡟ࠕ࠿࡞ࡾ㝸ࡓࡾ࠸ሙྜࡣࠊヂ⪅ࡢ❧ሙ࡛ࠕㄝ᫂ࠖࢆຍ࠼ࡿࠖࡢ࠶ࡿゝㄒࡸᩥ໬㛫ࡢ㏻ヂ࡛ࡣࠊ㏻ヂ⪅࡟ᬑ㏻ࡢヂฟ௨ୖࡢࡇ࡜ࡀồࡵࡽࢀࡿࠋㄗゎࢆᣍࡁ࠿ࡡ࡞࠸ྵពࡣ᫂♧ࡋࠊ㍍ࡃ࡯ࡢࡵ࠿ࡉࢀࡓࡇ࡜ࢆㄝ᫂ࡋࡓࡾࡶࡍࡿࠖ(109) ᙺ๭ࢆᯝࡓࡍࡢ࡛࠶ࡿࠋ
ࠉ᭦࡟ࠊGoffman(1981) ࡣࠊㄯヰࡢ୰࡛ヰࡋᡭ࡜⪺ࡁᡭࡢ㛵ಀ࡟ᑐᛂࡋ࡚ヰࡋᡭࡀᙺ๭ࢆẟࠉ฼ࠉ㞞ࠉᏊኚ࠼ࡿࡇ࡜ࢆࣇࢵࢸ࢕ࣥࢢ (footing) ࡜࠸࠺ᴫᛕࢆ⏝࠸࡚ㄝ᫂ࡋ࡚࠸ࡿࠋ
A change in footing implies a change in the alignment we take up to ourselves andthe others present as expressed in the way we manage the production or reception ofan utterance. A change in our footing is another way of talking about a change in ourframe for events. (128)ࠉࡇࢀࢆᐇ㝿ࡢἲᘐ࡟ᙜ࡚ࡣࡵ᳨࡚ドࡍࡿࠋࡲࡎἲᘐ࡛ࡢࢡࣛ࢖࢔ࣥࢺࡣࠊ❧ሙࡢ␗࡞ࡿ
5 㹼 6 ⪅㸦᳨ᐹᐁࠊᘚㆤேࠊⱥㄒ᳨ᐹഃドேࠊⱥㄒ᝟≧ドேࠊ⿢ุᐁࠊሙྜ࡟ࡼࡗ࡚ࡣ⿢
ุဨ㸧ࡀᏑᅾࡍࡿࠋࡑࡋ࡚ࠊ❧ሙࡢ␗࡞ࡿⓎヰ⪅ࡢㄯヰࢆ᪥ᮏ࠿ࡽⱥㄒࠊࡶࡋࡃࡣⱥㄒ࠿ࡽ᪥ᮏㄒ࡟ヂฟࡍࡿ࡜࠸࠺཮᪉ྥࡢ㏻ヂࢆࠊἲᘐ㏻ヂேࡣ 1 ே㸦⿢ุဨ⿢ุࡢሙྜࡣᇶᮏ
ⓗ࡟ 2 ே㸧࡛඲࡚ᢸࢃ࡞ࡅࢀࡤ࡞ࡽ࡞࠸ࠋ㏻ヂேࡢ୰❧ᛶࢆ⪃៖ࡍࡿࡢ࡛࠶ࢀࡤࠊ඲ἲᘐཧ୚⪅ࡑࢀࡒࢀ࡟㏻ヂேࡀ௜ࡃࡢࡀ⌮᝿ࡔࡀࠊ≀⌮ⓗ࡟㠀⌧ᐇⓗ࡞ࡢࡀ⌧≧࡛࠶ࡿࠋࡇࢀࡣࠊヰࡋᡭ࡜⪺ࡁᡭࡢ㛵ಀ࡟ᑐᛂࡍࡿᙺ๭ኚ໬ࡢࡳ࡞ࡽࡎࠊヰࡋᡭࡢ❧ሙ࡟ࡶ࡞ࢀࡤ⪺ࡁᡭࡢ❧ሙ࡟ࡶ࡞ࡾࠊࡑࡢ㒔ᗘࣇࢵࢸ࢕ࣥࢢࢆኚ໬ࡉࡏ࡚ㄯヰࡢヂฟࢆࡋ࡞ࡅࢀࡤ࡞ࡽ࡞࠸
ࡢࡀἲᘐ㏻ヂே࡜࠸࠺ࡇ࡜ࢆព࿡ࡍࡿࠋࡘࡲࡾࠊࣇࢵࢸ࢕ࣥࢢࡢኚ᭦࡟ࡼࡗ࡚ࠊࡑࡢヂฟ
࠿ࡽ 1 ࡘࡢ஦᱌࡟ᑐࡋࠊ」ᩘࡢ≀ㄒࠊ」ᩘࡢ஦᱌ࡢぢ᪉ࡀ⾲ฟࡉࢀࡿࡇ࡜࡟࡞ࡿࠋ
Hatim and Mason ࡸࢭࣞࢫࢥࣅࢵࢳࡣᩥ໬࡜ゝㄒࡢ㛵ಀ࡟ゝཬࡋࠊFairclough ࡜Wadensjö ࡣᶒຊ࡜ゝㄒࡢ㛵ಀࠊࡑࡋ࡚ࢤ࣮ࢺ࣮࢟ࣆࣥࢢ࡟ࡘ࠸࡚ㄽࡌ࡚࠸ࡿࠋ㏻ヂேࡣゝㄒእࡢព࿡ࡶྵࡵ࡚➼౯ᛶ࡜ṇ☜ᛶࡢ⥔ᣢ࡟ດࡵࠊࡉࡽ࡟ࡑࢀࡒࢀࡢヰࡋᡭ࡟ᛂࡌ࡚ࣇࢵࢸ࢕ࣥࢢࢆኚ໬ࡉࡏ࡚㏻ヂࢆࡋ࡞ࡅࢀࡤ࡞ࡽ࡞࠸❧ሙ࡟࠶ࡿࠋࠉࡲࡓࠊྖἲ࡜࠸࠺≉Ṧ࡞ሙ࡛ࡢ㏻ヂ࡛ࡣࠕṇ☜ᛶࠖࡀṦ࡟㔜せ࡛࠶ࡿࠋࡋ࠿ࡋࠊࠕṇ☜ᛶࠖ࡜࠸ࡗ࡚ࡶࡑࡢព࿡ࡍࡿ࡜ࡇࢁࡣࠊᙧᘧⓗṇ☜ᛶࡸព࿡ⓗṇ☜ᛶ࡞࡝␗࡞ࡗࡓᖜᗈ࠸ゎ㔘ࡀᏑᅾࡍࡿࠋゝㄒࢆヂࡍ࡜࠸࠺ࡇ࡜ࡣ༢࡞ࡿ༢ㄒࡢ⨨ࡁ᥮࠼సᴗ࡛ࡣ࡞࠸ࠋἲᘐ㏻ヂேࡣࠊ᪥ᮏேἲᘐཧ୚⪅࡟ᑐࡋ࡚ࠊእᅜே⿕࿌ே࠿ࡽࡢㄯヰࡣᙼࡽࡢゝㄒⓗ࣭ᩥ໬ⓗᕪ␗ࡶྵࡵ
ࡓព࿡ࡲ࡛ヂฟࡋ࡞ࡅࢀࡤ࡞ࡽ࡞࠸ࠋࡲࡓ㏫ࡶࡋ࠿ࡾ࡛ࠊእᅜே⿕࿌ே࡟ᑐࡋ࡚ࡣࠊ᪥ᮏࡢྖἲ࣭ゝㄒ࣭ᩥ໬ࢆకࡗࡓㄯヰࢆࠊゝㄒእ࡛ࡢព࿡ࢆࡶవࡍࡇ࡜࡞ࡃヂฟࡋ࣓ࢵࢭ࣮ࢪ
ࢆఏ࠼࡞ࡅࢀࡤ࡞ࡽ࡞࠸ࠋࡇࡢࡇ࡜ࡀἲᘐ㏻ヂேࡢ౑࿨ࡔ࡜⪃࠼ࢀࡤࠊఱࡽ࠿ࡢ⿵㊊ࠊ㏣
ຍࠊ⦅㞟ࢆకࡗࡓ࡜ࡋ࡚ࡶࠊ㏻ヂேࡣព࿡ⓗ➼౯ᛶ࣭ṇ☜ᛶࢆ⥔ᣢࡍࡿᚲせࡀ࠶ࡿ࡜⪃࠼ࡽࢀࡿࠋ

㸱㸬᪥ᮏேドேᑜၥࡢ㏻ヂ
ࠉHatim and Mason ࡸ Fairclough ࡀㄽࡌ࡚࠸ࡿࡼ࠺࡟ࠊἲᘐ㏻ヂேࡣ᪥ᮏㄒ୺యࡢἲᘐ࡜࠸࠺ሙ࡛ࠊᶒຊ⪅ഃ㸦ἲᘐཧ୚⪅㸧ࡢ᪥ᮏㄒ࡜㠀ᶒຊഃ㸦እᅜே⿕࿌ே㸧ࡢ㏻ヂࢆ⾜࠺ࠋࡑࡇ࡛ࡣࠊⓎヰ࡟కࡗࡓᩥ໬࡞࡝ࡢゝㄒእព࿡ࠊࡲࡓᶒຊᵓ㐀ࡀᏑᅾࡍࡿἲᘐ࡛ࡣࠊࢤ࣮
ࢺ࣮࢟ࣆࣥࢢࡢᙺ๭ࡶᯝࡓࡉ࡞ࡅࢀࡤ࡞ࡽ࡞࠸ࠋࡇࢀࡽḢ⡿ࡢඛ⾜◊✲౛࡟ຍ࠼ࠊ᪥ᮏㄒ
ᅛ᭷ࡢ≉ᚩࡶ౛♧ࡋ࡞ࡀࡽࠊᮏㄽ࡛ࡣእᅜே⿕࿌ேබุ࡟࠾࠸࡚ࠊ᳨ᐹഃドேࠊ᝟≧ドே࡜ࡶ᪥ᮏேࡀฟᘐࡋࡓࢣ࣮ࢫࢆྲྀࡾୖࡆ࡚ࠊࡑࡢ㏻ヂୖࡢㄢ㢟ࢆ᳨ウࡍࡿࠋࠉࡇࢀࡣࠊ⿕࿌ேࡢࡳࡀእᅜே࡛࠶ࡾ᪥ᮏㄒࢆ௓ࡉ࡞࠸࡜࠸࠺≧ἣ࡛࠶ࡿࠋἲᘐཧ୚⪅ࡶドே࡜ࡶ᪥ᮏே࡛࠶ࡿࡓࡵࠊ㏻ヂࡣ୙せࡢࡼ࠺࡟ㄗゎࡉࢀࡀࡕ࡛࠶ࡿࡀࠊ⿕࿌ேࡣࡑࡢᚋ᪥ᮏேドேᑜၥ࡟࠾ࡅࡿἲᘐ㏻ヂ㸸ࡑࡢㄢ㢟࡜ᑐᛂ⟇⾜ࢃࢀࡿ⿕࿌ே㉁ၥࡢࡓࡵ࡟ࡶドேᑜၥࡢෆᐜࢆ඲࡚⌮ゎࡋ࡚࠾ࡃᚲせࡀ࠶ࡿࠋࡑࡢࡓࡵࠊ᪥ᮏㄒࢆ௓ࡉ࡞࠸⿕࿌ேࡢࡳࡢࡓࡵ࡟ࠊ᪥ᮏㄒ࡛ࡢ㉁␲ᛂ⟅ࢆ඲࡚ⱥㄒ࡟㏻ヂࡍࡿᚲせࡀ࠶ࡿࠋࠉࡋ࠿ࡋࠊドேࡣఱ࡛ࡶ⮬⏤࡟Ⓨゝฟ᮶ࡿ࡜࠸࠺ࢃࡅ࡛ࡣ࡞࠸ࠋἲᘐ࡛ࡣἲᘐཧ୚⪅ࡀᶒጾ⪅࣭ᶒຊ⪅࡛࠶ࡾࠊⓎゝࢆࢥࣥࢺ࣮ࣟࣝࡋㄯヰࡢ᪉ྥᛶࢆỴᐃࡍࡿ❧ሙ࡟࠶ࡿࠋ୍᪉ࠊドேࡣ㠀ᶒຊ⪅ഃ࡛࠶ࡾࠊ࠶ࡃࡲ࡛ࠕᑜࡡࡽࢀࡓࡇ࡜࡟ᑐࡋ࡚ࠖ⟅࠼ࡿࡇ࡜ࡀฟ᮶ࡿࡢ࡛࠶ࡾࠊ඲ࡃไ㝈ࡀ᥃࠿ࡽ࡞࠸≧ែ࡛⮬ศࡢពぢࡸពᛮࢆ⮬⏤࡟㝞㏙ฟ᮶ࡿࢃࡅ࡛ࡣ࡞࠸ࠋ
ࡇࢀ࡟ࡘ࠸࡚ࡣࠊHale(2004) ࡀ௨ୗࡢࡼ࠺࡟ࡲ࡜ࡵ࡚࠸ࡿࠋThose with the institutional authority to ask the questions are also in a position toset the agenda and control the ow of information, thus becoming the powerfulparticipants in the exchange. On the other hand, the witnesses, who are onlypermitted to answer relevantly in restricted ways, become the powerlessparticipants. (32)ࡉࡽ࡟ Hale(2004) ࡣࠊ୺ᑜၥ࡜཯ᑐᑜၥࡢ≉ᛶ࡟ࡘ࠸࡚ࠊ๓⪅ࡣྛࠎࡢ❧ሙ࡟࡜ࡗ࡚᭷฼࡞ࡼ࠺࡟ㄯヰࢆᒎ㛤ࡍ࡭ࡃࠊᩛᑐࡋ࡞࠸ࡼ࠺࡞ᙧ࡛ドே࡟⮬⏤࡟Ⓨゝࡉࡏࡿഴྥ࡟࠶ࡿࠋ
㏫࡟ࠊᚋ⪅ࡣࠊドேࡸドᣐ࡟࠾ࡅࡿ୙୍⮴ࡢⅬࡸㄢ㢟ࠊᙅⅬࢆ࠶ࡪࡾฟࡍࡓࡵࡢࡶࡢ࡛࠶ࡿ࡜ࡋ࡚࠸ࡿࠋ
Examination-in-chief and cross-examination differ in purpose and in the language
strategies used by counsel. The purpose of examination-in-chief is to present theinterrogating side’s version of the facts in a favourable and convincing way. This is
usually achieved by asking questions that are non-confrontational and that allow thewitness more freedom to speak. Leading questions, which provide more information
than they ask, are not allowed in examination-in-chief except when asking noncontroversial, uncontested information. The reason for this is that the evidence needs
to originate from the witness. The purpose of cross-examination, on the other hand,is to discredit and challenge the evidence of the witness that is being cross-examined,
thus weakening the case for the other side, and to attempt to convince the decision
maker/s that the cross-examiner’s version of facts is the one to be believed. (33)ࠉࡇࡢࡼ࠺࡟ࠊドேᑜၥ࡛ࡣㄯヰࢆࢥࣥࢺ࣮ࣟࣝࡋࡼ࠺࡜ࡍࡿᶒຊഃࡢᡓ␎ࠊⓎゝࢆไ㝈ࡉࢀࡿ㠀ᶒຊഃࡢㄯヰࡢ≉ᚩࢆ㋃ࡲ࠼ࠊ᭦࡟ゝㄒእࡢព࿡ࡸᩥ໬ࡶໟྵࡋ࡞ࡀࡽࠊ1 ேࡢ
ἲᘐ㏻ヂேࡀㄯヰࡢ㒔ᗘࣇࢵࢸ࢕ࣥࢢࢆኚ᭦ࡋ࡚ヂฟࢆ⾜ࢃ࡞ࡅࢀࡤ࡞ࡽ࡞࠸ࠋࡇࢀࢆ๓ᥦ࡜ࡋࠊ㟁☢ⓗグ㘓୙ṇసฟ࠾ࡼࡧඹ⏝஦௳࡛ࡢㄯヰࢆ౛࡜ࡋ࡚᪥ᮏேドேᑜၥ㏻ヂࡢㄢ㢟ࢆㄽࡌ࡚࠸ࡃࠋ

ࠉ᪥ᮏேྠኈ≉᭷ࡢࢥ࣑ࣗࢽࢣ࣮ࢩࣙࣥࢫࢱ࢖ࣝἲᘐ࡛ࡢⓎゝࡣ඲࡚ドᣐ࡜࡞ࡿࡇ࡜࠿ࡽࠊ᪥ᮏேྠኈ࡛ࠊ
ࠕ㜿࿂ࡢ࿧྾ࠖࡸࠕᩥ⬦ࢆㄞࡴࠖẟࠉ฼ࠉ㞞ࠉᏊ࡜࠸ࡗࡓ᫂ゝࢆ㑊ࡅࡓⓎゝࠊࡲࡓゝ㉁ࢆྲྀࡽࢀࡿࡇ࡜ࢆ㑊ࡅࡼ࠺࡜᭕᫕࡞⾲⌧࡛࠶ࡗࡓࡾࠊ᏶⤖ࡋ࡞࠸᪥ᮏㄒᩥࡀ⾲ฟࡍࡿࡇ࡜ࡀ࠶ࡿࠋࡇࡢሙྜࠊ⿵࠺᝟ሗࡀ࡞࠸ࡢ࡛ᩥ⬦ࢆㄞࢇ࡛ヂฟࡍࡿᚲせࡀ࠶ࡿࠋࡋ࠿ࡋࠊⓎヰ⪅ࡀゝ࠸ษࡗ࡚࠸࡞࠸ሙྜࠊࡑࢀࢆ᩿ゝࡋࡓࡼ࠺࡞ヂฟࡣ⾜ࢃ࡞࠸ࠋBerg-Seligson(1990/2002) ࡀゝཬࡍࡿࡼ࠺࡟ࠊドேࡸ⿕࿌ேࡀ᫂ࡽ࠿࡟ᅔᝨࡋࠊព࿡ࡢ࡞࠸⟅࠼᪉ࢆࡋࡼ࠺࡜ࡋ࡚࠸ࡿ᫬ࡣࠊࣉࣟࡢ㏻ヂே࡛ࡍࡽἲᘐグ㘓࡟ཱྀࢆᕪࡋᣳࡴࡇ࡜ࡀ
⏕ࡌࡿྍ⬟ᛶࡀ࠶ࡿࠋࡇࢀࡣ㏻ᖖࠊᘚㆤேࡸ⿢ุᐁ࡟ドே࣭⿕࿌ேࡢ⟅࠼ࢆㄝ᫂ࡍࡿࡓࡵ࡟ࠊ⿢ุᐁ࡟チྍࢆ⏦ࡋฟࡿࡇ࡜࡟ࡼࡗ࡚ᡂࡉࢀࡿࠋ
When a witness or defendant clearly is confused and keeps responding to aquestion in a meaningless fashion, even highly professional interpreters may
interject themselves into the court record. This is usually done by asking the judge
for permission to speak in order to explain to the attorney and to the judge the sourceof the witness’s/defendant’s answer. (66)㸦 ౛ 1㸧ࠉࡇࢀࡣ᳨ᐹഃドேᑜၥ࡛࠶ࡿࠋドேࡣ㐣ཤ࡟⿕࿌ே࡜ぶࡋ࠿ࡗࡓࡶࡢࡢࠊ࣮࢝ࢻࢆ┐ࡲࢀࡓྍ⬟ᛶࡀ࠶ࡿ࡜౪㏙ࠊࡑࡢᚋ␯㐲࡟࡞ࡗ࡚࠸ࡓࠋ᳨ᐹഃࡣ┐ࢇࡔࡢࡣ⿕࿌ே࡛ࡣ࡞࠸ࠕㄡ࠿࡜ࡋࠊドே࠿ࡽ⿕࿌ேࡢྡ๓ࢆᘬࡁฟࡑ࠺࡜ࡋ࡚࠸ࡿࠋࡋ࠿ࡋドேࡢ᭱ᚋࡢⓎゝࡣࠊࡀࡸࡗࡓ࠿ࢃ࠿ࡽ࡞࠸ࡀࠊከศ A ࠿ B ࡛ࡣ࡞࠸࠿ࠋࠖ࡜࠶ࡃࡲ࡛᝿ീࡢୖ࡛ࡢᅇ⟅࡛ࠊ᫂ゝࢆ㑊ࡅࡣࡗࡁࡾ┦ᡭࢆ♧ࡋ࡚࠸࡞࠸ࠋᚑࡗ࡚ࠊ”maybe A or B” ࡜ࡣࡗࡁࡾࡋ࡞࠸ࡇ࡜ࢆⱥヂ࡛ࡶ♧ࡋࡓࠋ᳨ᐹᐁ㸸ࡑࢀࡣࠊ㈗᪉ࡢ࣮࢝ࢻ᝟ሗࡀ┐ࡲࢀࡓ࡜࠸࠺ࡇ࡜࡛ࡍ࠿ࠊࡑࢀ࡜ࡶ࣮࢝ࢻ⮬యࡀ┐ࡲࢀࡓ࡜࠸࠺ࡇ࡜࡛ࡍ࠿ࠋ
㏻ ヂ ே㸸Does it mean your card information was skimmed, or your card itself wasstolen?
ドே㸸࣮࢝ࢻࡣᐙ࡟࠶ࡿࡢ࡛ࠊ࣮࢝ࢻ᝟ሗࡀ┐ࡲࢀࡓࡢࡔ࡜ᛮ࠸ࡲࡍࠋ㏻ヂே㸸I have my card at home, so I think my card information was skimmed.
᳨ᐹᐁ㸸ㄡࡀࡸࡗࡓ࡜ᛮ࠸ࡲࡍ࠿ࠋ㏻ヂே㸸Who do you think has skimmed your card?
ドே㸸ࢃ࠿ࡾࡲࡏࢇࠊA ࠿ B࣭࣭࣭ࠋ
㏻ヂே㸸I don’t know, maybe A or B…
㸦 ౛ 2㸧
ࠉ౛ 1 ࡜ྠࡌドேࡢⓎゝ࡛࠶ࡿࠋ᪥ᮏㄒࡢㄒᙡ࡜ᩥ⬦࡛ࡢ⏝ἲ࡟࠾࠸࡚ࠊ༢ㄒࡢព࿡ࡍࡿ
ࢽࣗ࢔ࣥࢫࡀ␗࡞ࡗ࡚࠸ࡿࡶࡢࡀ࠶ࡿࠋࡑࡢ౛࡜ࡋ࡚ࠊࡇࡇ࡛ࡣࠕᜊឡ㛵ಀࠖࢆ࠸࠺༢ㄒ
ࢆྲྀࡾୖࡆࡓࠋ
ࠕᜊឡ㛵ಀࠖࠕᜊឡࠖ࡜ࡣ࡝ࡇࡲ࡛ࡢࡶࡢࢆᣦࡋ࡚࠸ࡿࡢ࠿ࡀ᫂♧ࡉࢀ࡚࠸࡞࠸ࡓࡵࠊලయⓗ࡞ⱥㄒ࡟ヂฟࡋ࡟ࡃ࠸༢ㄒ࡛࠶ࡿࠋࡲࡓࠕዲពࠖ࡜࠸࠺༢ㄒࡶࠊ࡝ࡇࡲ
ࠕᜊឡࠖ࡜ࠕዲពࠖࡢ㐪࠸ࡶேࡑࢀ࡛ࢆྵࡵ࡚࠸ࡿࡢ࠿ࡣࡑࢀࡒࢀࡢ⌮ゎ࡟ࡼࡿ࡜⪃࠼ࠊࡒࢀ࡛࠶ࡿࠋࡇࡢ஦᱌࡛ࡣ㉁ၥ⪅ࡶドேࡶ᪥ᮏே࡛࠶ࡾ᪥ᮏㄒ࡛ᑜၥࡀ⾜ࢃࢀࡓࡀࠊドே
࠿ࡽࡶ㉁ၥ⪅㸦ࡇࡇ࡛ࡣᘚㆤே㸧ࡢពᅗࡍࡿ࡜ࡇࢁࡀࡼࡃࢃ࠿ࡽ࡞࠿ࡗࡓࡼ࠺࡛ࠊ⪺ࡁ㏉᪥ᮏேドேᑜၥ࡟࠾ࡅࡿἲᘐ㏻ヂ㸸ࡑࡢㄢ㢟࡜ᑐᛂ⟇ࡉࢀ࡚࠸ࡓࠋࡇࡢሙྜࠊlike ࡞ࡢ࠿ love ࡞ࡢ࠿ఱᗘ࠿☜ㄆࡋࡓࡀࠊᘚㆤே࠿ࡽࡣ᫂☜࡟ࡑࡢព࿡࣭ពᅗࡀ♧ࡉࢀࡎࠊࡲࡓ㉁ၥࡢ㒔ᗘࠊ⧞ࡾ㏉ࡋ☜ㄆࡍࡿࡇ࡜ࡀᐇ㝿ࡢἲᘐ࡛ࡣᅔ
㞴ࡔࡗࡓࠋࡇࡇ࡛ࡣࠊ๓ࡢ㉁ၥ࡛ࡶࠕᜊឡ㛵ಀࠖ࡜࠸࠺⾲⌧ࡀᘚㆤே࠿ࡽฟ࡚࠾ࡾࠊࠕ཭ேࠖ
࡛ࡣ࡞ࡃ⏨ዪࡢࠕᜊឡࠖ࡜࠸࠺ពᅗࡀఛ࠼ࡓࡢ࡛ࠊᩒ࠼࡚ love ࡛ヂฟࡋࡓࠋᘚㆤே㸸ࡑࢀ࡛ࡣ࠾ᑜࡡࡋࡲࡍࠋ㈗᪉࡜ A ࡜ࡢ㛵ಀࡣ࡝ࡢࡼ࠺࡞ࡶࡢ࡛ࡍ࠿ࠋ
㏻ヂே㸸How is the relationship between you and A?
ドே㸸཭㐩࡛ࡍࠋ
㏻ヂே㸸He is a friend.
ᘚㆤே㸸ᜊឡ㛵ಀ࡛ࡣ࡞࠿ࡗࡓࡢ࡛ࡍ࠿ࠋ
㏻ヂே㸸Didn’t you love him or have loving or favorable relationship with him?
ドே㸸㐪࠸ࡲࡍࠋ
㏻ヂே㸸No, I didn’t.
ᘚㆤே㸸ዲពࢆᢪ࠸࡚࠸ࡓࡢ࡛ࡣ࠶ࡾࡲࡏࢇ࠿ࠋ
㏻ヂே㸸Didn’t you love him or like him?
ドே㸸ዲព࡜࠸࠺ࡢࡣࠊே࡟ࡼࡗ࡚㐪࠸ࡲࡍ࠿ࡽࠋ
㏻ヂே㸸Love or like means differently depending on people or situation.
㸦 ౛ 3㸧ࠉࡇࢀࡣ᳨ᐹഃドே࡟ᑐࡍࡿᘚㆤேࡢ཯ᑐᑜၥ࡛࠶ࡿࠋドேࡣ⿕࿌ேࡢ⩏ጜ࡛࠶ࡿࡀࠊࠕ⮬ศࡓࡕࡣ㛵ಀ࡞࠸ࠊ㛵ࢃࡗ࡚࠸࡞࠸ࠋ⩏⌮ぶ᪘࡜ゝࡗ࡚ࡶぶࡋࡃ࡞࠿ࡗࡓࠖࡇ࡜ࢆᙉㄪࡋࡼ࠺࡜ࡋ࡚࠸ࡿࠋࡑࡢ୰࡛ࠊᘚㆤேࡣぶ᪘㸦⿕࿌ேࡢ඗㸧ࡀ᪥ᮏ࡟㛗ࡃ⁫ᅾࡋ࡞ࡀࡽ᪥ᮏㄒࡀฟ᮶࡞࠸⌮⏤ࢆලయⓗ࡟ᑜࡡ࡚࠸ࡿࡀࠊドேࡣࡑࢀ࡟⟅࠼ࡎࠊࠕ୙⮬⏤ࡣ࡞࠸ࠖ࡜ࡣࡄࡽ࠿ࡋࡓ⟅࠼ࢆࡋ࡚ࠊ᪥ᮏㄒࡀὶᬸ࡞⿕࿌ேࡀ᪥ᮏ࡛ࡢ⩏⌮ぶ᪘ࡢ⏕άࢆᨭ᥼ࡋࠊࡲࡓ
⩏⌮ぶ᪘ࡶࡇࡢ஦᱌࡟㛵ࢃࡗ࡚࠸ࡓࡢ࡛ࡣ࡞࠸࠿࡜࠸࠺␲ၥࢆᡶᣔࡋࡼ࠺࡜ࡋ࡚࠸ࡿࠋᘚㆤே㸸ࡑࢀࡔࡅ୍⥴࡟ᬽࡽࡋ࡚࠸࡚ࠊ࡞ࡐᙼࡣ᪥ᮏㄒࡀฟ᮶࡞࠸ࡢ࡛ࡍ࠿ࠋ
㏻ヂே㸸Why can’t he speak Japanese, even though he lived with you so long?
ドே㸸ู࡟࡛ࡁ࡞ࡃ࡚ࡶࠊ୙⮬⏤ࡣ࡞࠸࡜ᛮ࠸ࡲࡍࠋ᪥ᖖ⏕ά࡛ࡣ⚾ࡀ࠸ࡲࡍ࠿ࡽࠋ
㏻ヂே㸸There would be no problem, even if he doesn’t speak Japanese. In daily life, I
was with him.
ᘚㆤே㸸ᙼ 1 ே࡛㈙࠸≀࡟⾜ࡗࡓࡾࡋ࡞࠸ࡢ࡛ࡍ࠿ࠋ
㏻ヂே㸸Didn’t he go shopping by himself alone?
ドே㸸ࡋࡲࡏࢇࠊᇶᮏⓗ࡟ࡣ㈙࠸≀ࡣ࠸ࡘࡶ୍⥴࡛ࡋࡓࠋ㏻ヂே㸸No, basically we went shopping together.
㸦 ౛ 4㸧ࠉࡇࢀࡶ౛ 3 ྠᵝࠊ᳨ᐹഃドே࡟ᑐࡍࡿᘚㆤேࡢ཯ᑐᑜၥ࡛࠶ࡿࠋᤚᰝ㛵ಀ⪅࡟ᑐࡋࠊࠕ➹㊧㚷ᐃࡀฟ᮶ࡓࡣࡎࡔࠖ࡜ᬯ࡟ゝࡗ࡚࠸ࡿࡀࠊ᫂☜࡟ゝㄒ໬ࡋ࡚࠸࡞࠸ࠋᘚㆤே㸸ู࡟ᨵࡵ࡚᭩࠿ࡏ࡞ࡃ࡚ࡶࠊ⿕࿌ேࡣ 7 ᭶࡟㐊ᤕࡉࢀ࡚࠸ࡿࡢ࡛ࡍ࠿ࡽࠊ9 ᭶ࡢ᫬Ⅼ࡛ࡣ⿕࿌ேࡀ᭩࠸ࡓࡶࡢࡀ࠶ࡾࡲࡍࡼࡡࠋ
㏻ ヂ ே㸸I think it is not necessary to make defendant write again, because he wasarrested in July and you should have already had something that defendant wrote by
September.

ẟࠉ฼ࠉ㞞ࠉᏊドே㸸ࡣ࠸ࠋ
㏻ヂே㸸Yes.
ᘚㆤே㸸ࡑࢀ࡛ࡣࠊࡑࢀࡲ࡛࡟᭩࠸ࡓᩥᏐ࡛㚷ᐃ࡛ࡁࡓࡢ࡛ࡣ࠶ࡾࡲࡏࢇ࠿ࠋ
㏻ ヂ ே㸸Then, you could have identied his handwriting with whatever he wrote bythen. Don’t you think?
ドே㸸ᘚㆤேࡢ࠾ࡗࡋࡷࡿ㏻ࡾ࠿ࡶࡋࢀࡲࡏࢇࡀࠊᐇ㝿࡟㚷ᐃࡣࡋࡲࡏࢇ࡛ࡋࡓࠋ
㏻ヂே㸸You may be right, but we actually didn’t do it.
㸦 ౛ 5㸧ࠉ౛ 1 ࡜ྠࡌࠊ࠿ࡘ࡚⿕࿌ே࡜ぶࡋ࠿ࡗࡓ᳨ᐹഃドேᑜၥࡢ୍㒊࡛࠶ࡿࠋࡇࡇ࡛ࡢㄯヰࡣࠊドேࡢࠕ≛≅⪅ࡀቑ࠼ࡓࠖ࡜࠸࠺ᅇ⟅࡟ᑐࡋࠊᘚㆤேࡣࡑࡢព࿡ࢆᑜࡡ࡚࠸ࡿࠋࡋ࠿ࡋࠊドேࡣࡑࢀ࡟┤᥋⟅࠼ࡎࠕ㹼ࡋࡓࡽ࠸࠿ࡀ࡛ࡍ࠿ࠖ࡜ᙧែࡣ୎ᑀࡔࡀࠊᐇ㝿࡟ࡣࠕ⮬ศ࡛ࡸࢀࠖ࡜࠸࠺ࢺ࣮࡛ࣥㄒࡗ࡚࠸ࡿࠋࡲࡓࠊࡇࡢ᫬ࡢㄯヰ࡛ࡣࠊࠕࡑࢇ࡞ࡇ࡜ࡶ▱ࡽ࡞࠸ࡢ࠿ࠖ࡜࠸࠺ࢽࣗ࢔ࣥࢫࡀຍࢃࡗ࡚࠸ࡓࠋᚑࡗ࡚ࠊࠕ⮬ศ࡛ㄪ࡭ࡿ࡭ࡁࡔࠖ࡜࠸࠺ࢺ࣮ࣥࡢⱥヂ࡜ࡋࡓࠋᘚㆤே㸸ࡑࢀ࡛ࡣࠊᙼࡀ⤖፧ࡋࡓࡇ࡜ࢆఱ᫬▱ࡾࡲࡋࡓ࠿ࠋ
㏻ヂே㸸When did you know that he got married?
ドே㸸⤖፧ࡋࡓ᫬࡟ᙼ࠿ࡽ⪺ࡁࡲࡋࡓࠋ
㏻ヂே㸸I heard from him, when he got married.
ᘚㆤே㸸ࡑࡢ᫬ࠊ࡝࠺ᛮ࠸ࡲࡋࡓ࠿ࠋ
㏻ヂே㸸What did you think when you heard it?
ドே㸸࠶࠵ࡲࡓ᪥ᮏேࡢ≛≅⪅ࡀ㸯ேቑ࠼ࡓ࡞ࠊ࡜ᛮ࠸ࡲࡋࡓࠋ
㏻ヂே㸸Ah, I thought it caused one another Japanese victim.
ᘚㆤே㸸ࡑࢀࡣ࡝࠺࠸࠺ព࿡࡛ࡍ࠿ࠋ
㏻ヂே㸸What do you mean?
ドே㸸ࡑࢀࡣࡈ⮬ศ࡛ㄪ࡭ࡓࡽ࠸࠿ࡀ࡛ࡍ࠿ࠋᙼࡽࡢ⤖፧ほࢆࠋ
㏻ヂே㸸You should look for it by yourself, I mean, their way of thinking aboutmarriage.

ࠉドேࡢ㌋㌉࠸
ࠉࠕゝㄒእࡢព࿡ࠖほⅬ࠿ࡽぢࡿ࡜ࠊドேࡢⓎゝෆ࡟⏕ࡌࡿ㌋㌉࠸ࡶࡑࡢ 1 ౛࡜࡞ࢁ࠺ࠋドேࡀᅇ⟅ࡍࡿሙྜࠊࡍࡄ࡟⟅࠼ࡿሙྜࡶ࠶ࡿࡀࠊ㌋㌉࠸ࡸ࣮࣡ࢻࣇ࢕࣮ࣛࡀධࡿࡇ࡜ࡀ
࠶ࡿࠋ༢ㄒࡑࡢࡶࡢ࡟ࡣព࿡ࡣ࡞࠸ࡀࠊヂฟࡍࡿୖ࡛ࡣ㌋㌉࠸࡟ࡼࡿ༢ㄒࡸ࣮࣡ࢻࣇ࢕ࣛ
࣮ࡣ㠀ᖖ࡟㔜せ࡛࠶ࡿࠋࡇࢀ࡟ࡘ࠸࡚ࡣ Hale(2004) ࡀ௨ୗࡢࡼ࠺࡟㏙࡭࡚࠸ࡿࠋ
The maintenance of hedges and llers in the interpretation of the original answers isvery important for the evaluation of witness credibility as they modify the force of theutterance and give an indication of the level of commitment to the truthfulness of thestatement by the speaker. By being non-committal in their answers witnesses canavoid taking responsibility for the reliability of their answers and at the same time
not be accused of lying. (105)᪥ᮏேドேᑜၥ࡟࠾ࡅࡿἲᘐ㏻ヂ㸸ࡑࡢㄢ㢟࡜ᑐᛂ⟇ࡘࡲࡾࠊㄯヰෆࡢ㌋㌉࠸ࡸ࣮࣡ࢻࣇ࢕࣮ࣛࡣࠊドே࡟ᑐࡍࡿಙ㢗ᛶࡢᅵྎࠊᚰド࣭Ⓨゝࡢ┿ഇࡢุ᩿࡟ࡶࡘ࡞ࡀࡿ࠿ࡽ࡛࠶ࡿࠋᚑࡗ࡚ࠊ௨ୗ Hale(2004) ࡀThis indicates once again that when readily available equivalence exist, interpreters
will usually maintain them in their interpretations. (112)࡜ㄽࡌࡿࡼ࠺࡟ࠊ㏻ヂேࡣⓎヰ⪅ࡢㄒࡗ࡚࠸ࡿព࿡ࢆṇ☜࡟ఏ࠼ࡿࡓࡵ࡟ࠊヂฟ࡟ࡶ㌋㌉࠸ࡸࣇ࢕࣮ࣛࢆධࢀࡿ࡭ࡁ࡛࠶ࡿࠋ㸦 ౛ 6㸧
ࠉࡇࢀࡣࠊ᳨ᐹഃドே࡟ᑐࡍࡿᘚㆤேࡢ཯ᑐᑜၥ࡛࠶ࡿࠋᘚㆤே࡟㏣ཬࡉࢀࡓドேࡣࠊࡇࡢㄯヰ࡛᭱ᚋ࡟ࠕࡣࡗࡁࡾࡋࡓ᪥࡟ࡕࡲ࡛ࡣ࣭࣭࣭ࠖ࡜ᩥࢆ᏶⤖ࡋ࡞࠸ࡲࡲⓎヰࢆ⤊஢ࡋ࡚࠸ࡿࠋබุ࡛ࡢ඲Ⓨゝࡣドᣐ࡜࡞ࡿࡢ࡛ࠊゝ㉁ࢆྲྀࡽࢀࡓࡃ࡞࠸ሙྜࡣࠊࡇࡢࡼ࠺࡟᭕
᫕࡟ᩥࢆ⤊ࢃࡽࡏ࡚࠸ࡿࠋࡇࡇ࡛ࡣࠕぬ࠼࡚࠸࡞࠸ࠖ࡜࠸࠺ࡇ࡜ࢆᬯ♧ࡋ࡚࠸ࡿⓎゝ࡞ࡢ࡛ࠊⱥㄒ࡛ࡣ ”I don’t remember the exact date.” ࡜ヂฟࡋࡓࠋᘚㆤே㸸࠸ࡘࡶࡑࡇ࡟⾜ࡗ࡚࠸ࡿࡢ࡛ࡍ࠿ࠋ
㏻ヂே㸸Did he always go there?
ドே㸸࠸࠼ࠊ2 㹼 3 ࣨᡤ࣮࢜ࢡࢩࣙࣥ఍ሙࡀ࠶ࡿ࡜⪺࠸࡚࠸ࡲࡍࠋ
㏻ヂே㸸No, I heard there are two or three auction sites.
ᘚㆤே㸸ࡑࢀ࡛ࡣࠊ඲㒊࡟௜࠸࡚⾜ࡗࡓࢃࡅ࡛ࡣ࡞࠸ࡢ࡛ࡍࡡࠋ
㏻ヂே㸸So, you didn’t go to all auction sites with him, did you?
ドே㸸඲㒊࡛ࡣ࠶ࡾࡲࡏࢇࠋ㏻ヂே㸸Not all.
ᘚㆤே㸸࠸ࡘ㡭௜࠸࡚࠸ࡗࡓࡢ࡛ࡍ࠿ࠋ
㏻ヂே㸸When did you go with him?
ドே㸸୍᫖ᖺ࡛ࡍࡀࠊࡣࡗࡁࡾࡋࡓ᪥࡟ࡕࡲ࡛ࡣ࣭࣭࣭ࠋ
㏻ヂே㸸It was two years ago, but I don’t remember the exact date.
㸦 ౛ 7㸧
ࠉ౛ 6 ྠᵝࠊ᳨ᐹഃドே࡟ᑐࡍࡿᘚㆤேࡢ཯ᑐᑜၥ࡛࠶ࡿࠋドேࡣࠊࠕ⚾ࡣࡕࡻࡗ࡜࣭࣭࣭ࠖ
࡜ᑼษࢀࢺࣥ࣎ࡢ᪥ᮏㄒ࡛ᩥࢆ⤊ࢃࡽࡏ࡚࠸ࡿࠋࡘࡲࡾࠊࡸࡗ࡚࠸࡞࠸࡜࠸࠺ព࿡࡛࠶ࡿࠋ
ᚑࡗ࡚ࠕࡸࡗ࡚࠸࡞࠸ࠖ࡜࠸࠺ព࿡࡛ࠊI didn’t. ࡜᫂☜࡟ヂฟࡋࡓࠋ᳨ᐹᐁ㸸ࡇࡢࣃࢯࢥࣥ࡟ࡣࠊEX ࡀධࡗ࡚࠸ࡲࡋࡓ࠿ࠋ㏻ヂே㸸Did this PC carry EX?
ドே㸸ࡣ࠸ࠋ
㏻ヂே㸸Yes.
᳨ᐹᐁ㸸ࡇࢀࡢ᭦᪂ࡣ☜ㄆࡋࡲࡋࡓ࠿ࠋ
㏻ヂே㸸Did you check the updated condition of that?
ドே㸸࠸࠼ࠊࡑࢀࡣ AA ᢏᐁࡀࡉࢀࡲࡋࡓࡢ࡛ࠊ⚾ࡣࡕࡻࡗ࡜࣭࣭࣭ࠋ
㏻ヂே㸸No, Mr. AA did, so I didn’t….ah….
㸦 ౛ 8㸧
ࠉࡇࢀࡶ౛ 6 ྠᵝࠊ᳨ᐹഃドே࡟ᑐࡍࡿᘚㆤேࡢ཯ᑐᑜၥ࡛࠶ࡿࠋࡇࡇ࡛ࡢⓎヰࡢ⤊ࢃẟࠉ฼ࠉ㞞ࠉᏊ

ࡾ᪉ࡣࠊࠕࡑࢀࡣࡑ࠺࡛ࡍࡀ 㺃㺃㺃ࠋࠖ࡜ṑษࢀࡀᝏࡃ㌋㌉࠸ࡀఛࢃࢀࠊ᪥ᮏㄒ࡜ࡋ࡚᏶⤖ࡋ࡚࠸࡞࠸ࠋࡼࡗ࡚ࠊ
ࠕࡑ࠺ࡔࡅࢀ࡝ࠖ࡜㏫ㄝࡢព࿡ࢆᣢࡓࡏࡓ᭕᫕࡞Ⓨゝ࡟⤊ጞࡋ࡚࠸ࡿࠋ
ࡲࡓࠕࡑࢀࡣࡕࡻࡗ࡜ 㺃㺃㺃ࠋࠖ࡜ࠊゝ࠸ษࢀ࡞࠸࡜࠸࠺ࡇ࡜ࢆໝࢃࡏ࡚࠸ࡿࡀࠊἲᘐ࡛ࡣ
඲Ⓨゝࡀドᣐ࡜࡞ࡿࡢ࡛ࠊ᭕᫕࡞ࡲࡲ࡛Ⓨヰࢆ⤊ࢃࡽࡏࡼ࠺࡜ࡋ࡚࠸ࡿࠋࡼࡗ࡚ࠊ㏻ヂேࡀᩥࢆゝ࠸ษࡗࡓヂฟࢆࡍࡿ࡜⿕࿌ே࡟ㄗゎࢆ୚࠼ࡿࡢ࡛ࠊドேࡀ᭕᫕࡟⤊ࢃࡽࡏ࡚࠸ࡿ
ࡇ࡜ࢆఏ࠼ࡿヂฟ࡜ࡍࡿࠋᘚㆤே㸸ࡑࢀ࡛ࡣࠊ࢔ࢡࢭࢫ᪥᫬ࡀኚࢃࡗ࡚࠸࡚ࡶࠊࡑࢀࡀ⿕࿌ேࡀ౑⏝ࡋࡓドᣐ࡟ࡣ࡞ࡽ࡞࠸ࡢ࡛ࡣ࠶ࡾࡲࡏࢇ࠿ࠋ
㏻ヂே㸸Then, even though the access date and time changed, this does not prove thatdefendant used that PC.
ドே㸸ࡑࢀࡣࡑ࠺࡛ࡍࡀ 㺃㺃㺃ࠋ㏻ヂே㸸No, but…
ᘚㆤே㸸࢔ࢡࢭࢫ᪥᫬ࡀኚࢃࡗ࡚࠸ࡿࡔࡅ࡛ࠊ⿕࿌ேࡀ౑⏝ࡋࡓ࡜ゝ࠸ษࢀࡲࡍ࠿ࠋ
㏻ヂே㸸Can you clearly say that the defendant used that PC, only by that the accessdate and time changed?
ドே㸸࠸࠼ࠊࡔ࠿ࡽࠊ㟁※ࢆධࢀࢀࡤኚࢃࡗ࡚ࡋࡲ࠺ࡢ࡛ࠊࡑࢀࡣࡕࡻࡗ࡜࣭࣭࣭ࠋ
㏻ヂே㸸No, they change only by turning on the PC, so it is…un.

ࠉᕪู࣭ࢫࣛࣥࢢ࡞࡝ࡢ⾲⌧ࡋ࡟ࡃ࠸Ⓨゝࠉ᪥ᮏㄒ࡜௚ゝㄒ࡛ࡣࠊᕪูⓗ⾲⌧ࡸࢫࣛࣥࢢࡶᖜࡸព࿡ࡀ␗࡞ࡿࠋࡇࡢ౛࡛ࡣ⨬ࡾゝⴥ࡟࡞ࡿࡀࠊ࡝ࡢ⛬ᗘࠕࡦ࡝࠸ࡇ࡜ࠖࢆヂฟࡍࡿࡢ࠿ࡀㄢ㢟ࡔࡀࠊࠕ࠾ᗑ࡟ࡣධࢀ࡞࠸ࠖ࡜⪃࠼ࡿ࡛ࣞ࣋ࣝࡢヂฟ࡜ࡍࡿࠋ㸦 ౛ 9㸧
ࠉ౛ 1 ࡜ྠࡌドேࡢⓎゝ࡛࠶ࡿࠋ᳨ᐹᐁ㸸A ࡟㢗ࡲࢀ࡚⾜ࡗࡓࡢ࡛ࡍ࠿ࠋ
㏻ヂே㸸Did you go there because A asked you?
ドே㸸ࡣ࠸ࠋ࠶ࡗ࡛ࡶࠊA ࡣ B ࡟㢗ࡲࢀࡓࡶࡢࡶ࠶ࡿ࡜ゝࡗ࡚࠸ࡲࡋࡓࠋ
㏻ヂே㸸Yes, ah…but A said that B asked him for several items.
᳨ᐹᐁ㸸࡞ࡐ㈗᪉ࡀ࠾ᗑ࡟⾜ࡗࡓࡢ࡛ࡍ࠿ࠋ㏻ヂே㸸Why did you go to that shop?
ドே㸸A ࡀࠊ㯮ேࡣᗑ࡟ධࢀ࡞࠸࡜ゝࡗࡓࡢ࡛ࠊ௦ࢃࡾ࡟⾜ࡗ࡚࡯ࡋ࠸࡜㢗ࡲࢀࡓ࠿ࡽ࡛ࡍࠋࡑࢀ࡟ࠊ௨๓࠾ᗑ࡛ࠕࢡࢯ㔝㑻ࡳࡓ࠸࡞ࡇ࡜࡜࠿௚࡟ࡶ࠸ࢁ࠸ࢁࡦ࡝࠸ࡇ࡜ࢆゝࢃࢀࡓࠋࠖ࡜ゝࡗ࡚࠸ࡓ࠿ࡽ࡛ࡍࠋ
㏻ヂே㸸Because A said any black guys were not allowed to enter the shop, so he asked
me to go there on behalf. He also said that somebody at shop said terrible things tohim; for example, “Son-of-a-bitch, asshole, or other terrible bad slangs.”
ࠉ࠿ࡳྜࢃ࡞࠸ㄯヰࠉドேࠊ≉࡟᝟≧ドேࡢᑜၥࡢሙྜ࡟ከࡃぢࡽࢀࡿࡢࡀࠊドேࡀ⥭ᙇࡋ࡚࠸ࡓࡾࠊឤ᝟ࡢ
ᦂࢀࡀ࠶ࡗ࡚ࠊ㉁ၥ࡜ᅇ⟅ࡀ࠿ࡳྜࢃ࡞࠸ࢣ࣮ࢫ࡛࠶ࡿࠋࡇࡢሙྜࠊ᫂ࡽ࠿࡟㉁ၥ࡟⟅࠼᪥ᮏேドேᑜၥ࡟࠾ࡅࡿἲᘐ㏻ヂ㸸ࡑࡢㄢ㢟࡜ᑐᛂ⟇࡚࠸࡞࠿ࡗࡓࡾࠊ࠿ࡳྜࢃ࡞࠸ᅇ⟅ࡋ࡚࠸ࡓ࡜ࡋ࡚ࡶࠊ㏻ヂேࡣࡑࡇ࡟௓ධࡋ࡚ࡣ࡞ࡽ࡞
࠸ࠋBerg-Seligson(1990/2002) ࡀㄽࡌࡿࡼ࠺࡟ࠊࡶࡋドேࡸ⿕࿌ேࡀࠊ㉁ၥ࡟㐺ษ࡟⟅࠼࡞࠿ࡗࡓሙྜࠊ㏻ヂேࡢ⩏ົࡣࡑࢀࢆ୍␒㏆࠸ⱥㄒ࡟㏻ヂࡍࡿࡇ࡜࡛࠶ࡿࠋࡓ࡜࠼ࡑࡢ⤖ᯝࡀࡰࡅࡓࡶࡢ࡛࠶ࡗࡓࡾព࿡ࢆᡂࡉ࡞࠸ࡶࡢ࡛࠶ࡗࡓ࡜ࡋ࡚࡛ࡶ࠶ࡿࠋ
If a witness or defendant in reply to a question answers improperly (e.g., tangentially,off-target), the interpreter’s obligation is to interpret that response in the nearest
English equivalent, even thought the outcome potentially may sound evasive or evennonsensical to those in the courtroom. (65)ࠉࡇࡇ࡛ࡣࠊ᝟≧ドே࡜ࡋ࡚ฟᘐࡋࡓ⿕࿌ேࡢጔࡢㄯヰࢆ౛࡜ࡋ࡚ᥦ♧ࡍࡿࠋ㸦 ౛ 10㸧ᘚㆤே㸸㐊ᤕࡉࢀࡓ࡜⪺࠸ࡓ᫬ࡣࠊ࡝࠺ᛮ࠸ࡲࡋࡓࠋ
㏻ヂே㸸What did you think when you heard that he was arrested?
ドே㸸࠸ࡸ࡛ࡋࡓࠋ
㏻ヂே㸸I didn’t feel well.
ᘚㆤே㸸࡝࠺ᛮ࠸ࡲࡋࡓ࠿ࠋ
㏻ヂே㸸How did you feel?
ドே㸸࢘ࢯࡔ࡜ᛮ࠸ࡲࡋࡓࠋ
㏻ヂே㸸I thought it was a lie.
㸦 ౛ 11㸧ᘚㆤே㸸⿕࿌ேࡣࠊᐙ᪘࡟࡜ࡗ࡚࡝ࢇ࡞Ꮡᅾ࡛ࡍ࠿ࠋ
㏻ヂே㸸What kind of existence is the defendant for family?
ドே㸸᜝ࡎ࠿ࡋ࠸ࡅࢀ࡝ࠊ኱㯮ᰕ࡛ࡍࠋ㏻ヂே㸸I am ashamed, but he is the mainstay, or a breadwinner.
ᘚㆤே㸸㈗᪉࡟࡜ࡗ࡚ࡣࠋ
㏻ヂே㸸How about yourself?
ドே㸸୍⥴࡟Ꮚ⫱࡚ࢆࡋࡓ࠸࡛ࡍࠋ
㏻ヂே㸸I would like to raise children with him.
ᘚㆤே㸸♫఍᚟ᖐࡋࡓࡽࠊᙼࢆ┘╩ࡍࡿᚲせࡀ࠶ࡾࡲࡍࡀࠊ㈗᪉ࡣఱࡀฟ᮶ࡲࡍ࠿ࠋ
㏻ヂே㸸When he comes back, you need to supervise him. What can you do for him?
ドே㸸1 ᪥ࡀ⤊ࢃࢀࡤᐙ࡟ᖐࡗ࡚ࡁ࡚࡯ࡋ࠸࡜ᛮ࠸ࡲࡍࠋࡲࡓᏛᰯࡸᆅᇦࡢ⾜஦࡟ࡶཧຍ
ࡋ࡚࡯ࡋ࠸࡜ᛮ࠸ࡲࡍࠋ
㏻ ヂ ே㸸 I want him to come back after work every day. I also want him to join theschool and community activities.
㸦 ౛ 12㸧᳨ᐹᐁ㸸ࡣ࠸ࠊࡑࢀ࡛ࡣ࠾ᑜࡡࡋࡲࡍࠋ㈗᪉ࡣ࢔ࣃ࣮ࢺ࡟ࡣ⾜ࡗࡓࡇ࡜ࡣ࠶ࡾࡲࡍ࠿ࠋ㏻ヂே㸸Have you ever been to the defendant’s apartment?
ドே㸸࠸࠸࠼ࠋ
㏻ヂே㸸No.

ẟࠉ฼ࠉ㞞ࠉᏊ᳨ᐹᐁ㸸ఱࡢࡓࡵ࡟࢔ࣃ࣮ࢺࢆ೉ࡾ࡚࠸ࡓࡢ࡛ࡍ࠿ࠋ
㏻ヂே㸸Why did he rent an apartment?
ドே㸸㡢ᴦࡢࡓࡵࡔ࡜⪺࠸࡚࠸ࡲࡍࠋ
㏻ヂே㸸I heard that it was for music.
᳨ᐹᐁ㸸࡞ࡐ⤖፧⏕άࡀ࠺ࡲࡃ࠸࠿࡞ࡃ࡞ࡗࡓࡢ࡛ࡍ࠿ࠋ
㏻ヂே㸸Why did you have problems on marriage life with him?
ドே㸸ᐙ࡟࠾㔠ࡉ࠼ධࢀ࡚ࡃࢀࢀࡤ࠸࠸࡜ᛮࡗ࡚࠸ࡓࡢ࡛࣭࣭࣭ࠋ
㏻ヂே㸸I think it just be OK if he gives money to me, so….

㸲㸬⤖ㄽ
ࠉἲᘐ㏻ヂே࡟࡜ࡗ࡚බุ࡟࠾ࡅࡿࢡࣛ࢖࢔ࣥࢺࡣࠊ❧ሙࡢ␗࡞ࡿ 5 㹼 6 ⪅㸦᳨ᐹᐁࠊᘚ
ㆤேࠊⱥㄒ᳨ᐹഃドேࠊⱥㄒ᝟≧ドேࠊ⿢ุᐁࠊሙྜ࡟ࡼࡗ࡚ࡣ⿢ุဨ㸧࡛࠶ࡾࠊ❧ሙࡢ
␗࡞ࡿⓎヰ⪅ࡢㄯヰࢆ᪥ᮏㄒ࠿ࡽⱥㄒࠊࡶࡋࡃࡣⱥㄒ࠿ࡽ᪥ᮏㄒ࡟ヂฟࡍࡿ࡜࠸࠺཮᪉ྥ
ࡢ㏻ヂࢆᇶᮏⓗ࡟ 1 ே㸦⿢ุဨ⿢ุࡢሙྜࡣ 2 ேࡢሙྜࡶ᭷ࡾ㸧࡛඲࡚ᢸࢃ࡞ࡅࢀࡤ࡞
ࡽ࡞࠸ࠋࡼࡗ࡚ࠊ❧ሙࡀ␗࡞ࢀࡤࠊㄯヰࡢពᅗࡶㄯヰᡓ␎ࡶࡑࢀࡒࢀ␗࡞ࡿࠋࡘࡲࡾࠊᮏ
᮶࡛࠶ࢀࡤἲᘐ࡛ࡶࢡࣛ࢖࢔ࣥࢺࡢᩘࡔࡅ㏻ヂேࡀᚲせࡔࢁ࠺ࠋࡋ࠿ࡋࠊ᪥ᮏࡢ⌧≧࡛ࡣࠊἲᘐ࡟㓄⨨ࡉࢀࡿ㏻ヂேࡣᇶᮏⓗ࡟ 1 ே࡛࠶ࡿࠋἲᘐ㏻ヂேࡣࠊⱥя᪥ࠊ᪥яⱥ࡜࠸࠺ゝㄒኚ໬ࡢࡳ࡞ࡽࡎࠊㄯヰ࡟ྵࡵࡽࢀࡓᡓ␎ࡸ❧ሙࠊពぢࡶⓎヰࡢᗘ࡟ኚ࠼ࣇࢵࢸ࢕ࣥࢢኚ
᭦ࢆ⾜࠸ࠊἲᘐ࡟࠾ࡅࡿࢤ࣮ࢺ࣮࢟ࣃ࣮ⓗᙺ๭ࢆᯝࡓࡋ࡞ࡀࡽࠊࢥ࣑ࣗࢽࢣ࣮ࢩࣙࣥࢆㄪᩚࡋ࡞ࡅࢀࡤ࡞ࡽ࡞࠸ࠋ
ࠉຍ࠼࡚᪥ᮏㄒドேࡢドேᑜၥㄯヰ㏻ヂࡣࠊ㉁ၥ㸦᪥ᮏㄒ㸧 ㉁ၥ㸦ⱥㄒ㸧 ⟅࠼㸦᪥ᮏㄒ㸧 ⟅࠼㸦ⱥㄒ㸧࡜࡞ࡾࠊ㉁ၥࡢ᪥ᮏㄒ࡜⟅࠼ࡢ᪥ᮏㄒ࡟㏻ヂேࡀ௓ධࡋ࡚ヂฟࡋ࡞ࡅࢀࡤ࡞ࡽ࡞࠸ࠋࡑࡇ࡟ࡣࠊ᪥ᮏㄒ≉᭷ࡢ᭕᫕ࡉࠊドேࡢ㌋㌉࠸ࠊᩥ໬ࡸᕪูࡶྵࢇࡔ
Ⓨゝࠊ࠿ࡳྜࢃ࡞࠸ㄯヰࡶྵࡲࢀ࡚࠸ࡿࠋドேࡢⓎゝ࡟ࡣࠊ㌋㌉࠸ࡸ࣮࣡ࢻࣇ࢕࣮ࣛ࡜࠸
ࡗࡓゝㄒⓗ࡟ࡣព࿡ࢆᡂࡉ࡞࠸ㄒࡶྵࡲࢀࡿࡀࠊࡑࢀࡽࡣឤ᝟⾲⌧࡛࠶ࡾࠊゝㄒ࡜ࡋ࡚ព࿡ࡀ࡞࠸࠿ࡽ࡜ヂฟ࠿ࡽ๐㝖ࡋ࡚ࠕࡁࢀ࠸࡞᪥ᮏㄒࠖ࡟ࡲ࡜ࡵࡿࠊࡶࡋࡃࡣ㏻ヂேࡢ຾ᡭ࡞ุ᩿࡛㉁ၥ࡟ἢ࠺ࡼ࠺࡞ᅇ⟅࡬࡜ಁࡋ࡚ࡣ࡞ࡽ࡞࠸ࠋ࡞ࡐ࡞ࡽࠊࡶࡋࠕࡁࢀ࠸࡞᪥ᮏㄒࠖ
࡟ࡲ࡜ࡵ࡚ࡋࡲ࠺࡜ࠊドேࡢឤ᝟ࡢᦂࢀࡀㄯヰ࠿ࡽᾘ࠼ཤࡿࡇ࡜࡛ࠊᅗࡽࡎࡶ㠀ᶒຊഃࡢཧ୚⪅㸦ドே㸧࡟ዲពⓗ࡟ᐤ୚ࡋ࡚ࡋࡲ࠺࠿ࡽ࡛࠶ࡿࠋ
ࠉࡶࡋ㏻ヂேࡀධࡽ࡞ࡅࢀࡤࠊ᪥ᮏㄒ࣭᪥ᮏேྠኈࡢドேᑜၥࡣ᭕᫕࡞᪥ᮏㄒ࡛ࡶ㏻ࡌ࡞
࠸ࢃࡅ࡛ࡣ࡞࠸ࡔࢁ࠺ࠋࡔࡀࠊ⿕࿌ேࡣ᪥ᮏㄒࢆ⌮ゎࡋ࡞࠸ࠋࡑࡢࡓࡵ࡟ἲᘐ㏻ヂேࡀᏑᅾࡍࡿࠋࡋ࠿ࡋࠊヰ⪅ࡣἲᘐཧ୚⪅࡜ドேࡣࡑࢀࡒࢀ❧ሙࡀ␗࡞ࡾࠊᡓ␎ࡸពᅗࡶ␗࡞ࡿࠋ
ࡇࡢㄯヰࢆ඲࡚ヂฟࡍࡿἲᘐ㏻ヂேࡣࠊ᪥ᮏㄒ≉᭷ࡢࢥ࣑ࣗࢽࢣ࣮ࢩࣙࣥࢫࢱ࢖ࣝࢆ㋃ࡲ
࠼ࠊヂฟࡍࡿᗘ࡟ࣇࢵࢸ࢕ࣥࢢࢆኚ࠼࡚ࠕ௓ධࠖࡍࡿᅔ㞴࡟┤㠃ࡋ࡞ࡀࡽࡶࠊ
ࠕㄪᩚࠖࢆ⾜࠸ᴟຊࡑࢀ࡟ᑐᛂࡋ࡞ࡅࢀࡤ࡞ࡽ࡞࠸ࠋࡑࡋ࡚ࠊ㏻ヂேࡣゝㄒࡢṇ☜ᛶ࣭➼౯ᛶࢆ⥔ᣢࡋ࡞ࡅࢀࡤ࡞ࡽ࡞࠸ࡢ࡛࠶ࡿࠋ
ࠉᮏㄽ࡛ࡣࠊ᪥ᮏேドேࡢドேᑜၥ㏻ヂ࡟࠾ࡅࡿㄢ㢟࡜ᑐᛂ⟇ࢆㄽࡌࡓࡀࠊ௒ᚋࡶἲᘐ㏻
ヂࢆྵࡵࡓྖἲ㏻ヂࡢㄢ㢟ࢆ⥅⥆ࡋ࡚◊✲ࢆ⥆ࡅࡓ࠸࡜⪃࠼࡚࠸ࡿࠋ

᪥ᮏேドேᑜၥ࡟࠾ࡅࡿἲᘐ㏻ヂ㸸ࡑࡢㄢ㢟࡜ᑐᛂ⟇ᘬ⏝ᩥ⊩ࢭࣞࢫࢥࣦ࢕ࢵࢳࠊࢲࢽࢵࢶ࢓㸦࣋ࣝࢪ࢙ࣟఀ⸨ᏹ⨾ヂ㸧(2009)ࠗ఍㆟㏻ヂ⪅࠘◊✲♫ .
Berg-Seligson, Susan. (1990/2002).
Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Harlow:Fairclough, Norman. (1989/2001).
Longman.
Gallois, Ogay & Giles. (2005). “Communication Accommodation Theory: A Look Backand a Look Ahead.” In W.B. Gudykunst (Ed.)
Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania
Goffman, Erving. (1981).
Press.
Amsterdam: John
Hale, Sandra Beatriz. (2004).
Benjamins.
. London: Longman.
Wadensjö, Cecilia. (1998).

