Kriminalistinės lingvistinės ekspertizės uždavinių sistema

LTLingvistinės ekspertizės uždaviniai mokslininkų kriminalistų suprantami nevienodai, todėl pateikiamos skirtingos jų sampratos, kartais nevienodai pavadinami tie patys dalykai ir specialiojoje literatūroje, ir kriminalistikos vadovėliuose. Neretai pateikiami tik uždavinių grupių pavadinimai, nepaaiškinama, kokie uždaviniai įeina į tas grupes. Tai buvo galima suprasti, kol šios ekspertizės teorija ir praktika dar tik formavimosi, buvo dar tik pradinių stadijų, tačiau pastaruoju metu, šio darbo autorės nuomone, tradicinius lingvistinės ekspertizės uždavinius jau galima aiškiai ir vienareikšmiškai apibrėžti. Todėl šio tyrimo tikslas – paanalizuoti skirtingas lingvistinės ekspertizės uždavinių sampratas, šių uždavinių tarpusavio ryšius ir pateikti lietuviškų tekstų lingvistinės ekspertizės uždavinių sistemą. Nagrinėjamos problemos tyrimo analizė šiame darbe apsiriboja Lietuvos, Ukrainos ir Rusijos kriminalistų darbais. Lietuviškų tekstų lingvistinė ekspertizė istoriškai yra labiau susijusi su Rytų Europos teismo lingvistiniais tyrimais, todėl ir nutarta pirmiausia išanalizuoti situaciją šioje aplinkoje, platesnę analizę paliekant ateičiai. [Iš leidinio]Reikšminiai žodžiai: Diagnostiniai ir klasifikaciniai uždaviniai; Diagnostiniai uždaviniai; Klasifikaciniai uždaviniai; Kriminalistinė lingvistinė ekspertizė; Teksto autoriaus identifikacija; Criminalistic lingvistic examination; Diagnostic and classification tasks; Forensic linguistics expert, author of a text identification, diagnostic tasks, the taxonomic challenges.

ENComprehension of criminalistic linguistic problems by separate scientists criminalists differs very much, so various conceptions of these problems are presented, sometimes the same items are named differently not only in special literature, but in criminalistics manual too. Frequently only names of tasks groups are presented and nobody explains what tasks form these groups in author's opinion. It was understandable twenty years ago when theory and practice of this examination was in initial stage or the formation, but from the first maintained dissertation in this area till our times many decades past and systematization of linguistic examination tasks become practical and theoretical necessity. Every task arose in practice may be solved if it is scientific validated. So, the creation of tasks system is vital question for the development of scientific basics of this examination. The aim of this investigation is analysis various conceptions of tasks of linguistic examination and presentation the system of Lithuanian texts linguistic examination tasks. Investigated problem research analysis in this work limits itself with Lithuanian, Ukrainian, Russian criminalists works as scientists from countries of Middle and West Europe working in this area pays more attention to possibilities of the application of linguistics science in forensic examination but not to systematization tasks of this examination.Besides, linguistic examination of Lithuanian texts for understandable reasons is traditionally related with East Europe Ukraine, Russia) school of forensic linguistic examinations and for this reason it was decided to analyse the situation in this medium primarily and more extensive analyse will be left for the future. In this paper the evolution of the formulation of linguistic examination tasks from 1980 is presented and interrelations of these tasks are evaluated. System of Lithuanian texts linguistic examination tasks is presented on the base of analysis of literary sources and examinational practice. Some questions are not discussed in literature as its are novel in examinational practice. […] In this work such system of Lithuanian texts criminalistic linguistic examination is proposed: Identification tasks: to determine author of text (or to prove that creator of text isn't suspect person). Classification tasks: 1) to determine if Lithuanian text author's mother tongue is Lithuanian or not Lithuanian; 2) to determine author's education and 3) to determine the area of author's activity. Diagnostic tasks: 1) to determine whether author created text in the ordinary or non-ordinary state; 2) to determine if text language was distorted intentionally; 3) to determine if author created text self-dependently and whether the text wasn't by one person dictated to another person. Non-traditional tasks at present differ very much and still aren't determined. This system must be consider as reflecting present requirements and possibilities. Its changes will depend on future requirements of forensic linguistics. [From the publication]