criminal psychology-第96章

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！


ifficult　positions　in　quarrels；　etc。；　that　every　listener　must　laugh。　At　the　same　time；　the　events　told　of　were　troublesome；　difficult；　even　quite　dangerous。　The　narrator　does　not　in　the　least　lie；　but　he　manages　to　give　his　story　the　twist　that　even　the　victim　of　the　situation　is　glad　to　laugh　at。＇1＇　As　Krpelin　says；　‘‘The　task　of　humor　is　to　rob　a　large　portion　of　human　misfortune　of　its　wounding　power。　It　does　so　by　presenting　to　us；　with　our　fellows　as　samples；　the　comedy　of　the　innumerable　stupidities　of　human　life。''


＇1＇　E。　Regnault：　La　Langage　par　Gestes。　La　Nature　XXVI；　315。


Now　suppose　that　a　really　humorous　witness　tells　a　story　which　involves　very　considerable　consequences；　but　which　he　does　not　really　end　with　tragic　conclusions。　Suppose　the　subject　to　be　a　great　brawl；　some　really　crass　deception；　some　story　of　an　attack　on　honor；　etc。　The　attitude　toward　the　event　is　altered　with　one　turn；　even　though　it　would　seem　to　have　been　generated　progressively　by　ten　preceding　witnesses　and　the　new　view　of　the　matter　makes　itself　valid　at　least　mildly　in　the　delivery　of　the　sentence。　Then　whoever　has　not　heard　the　whole　story　understands　the　results　least　of　all。

In　the　same　way　we　see　really　harmless　events　turned　into　tragedies　　by　the　testimony　of　a　black…visioned；　melancholy　witness；　without　his　having　used；　in　this　case　or　any　other；　a　single　untrue　word。　In　like　manner　the　bitterness　of　a　witness　who　considers　his　personal　experiences　to　be　generally　true；　may　color　and　determine　the　attitude　of　some；　not　at　all　serious；　event。　Nor　is　this　exaggeration。　Every　man　of　experience　will；　if　he　is　only　honest　enough；　confirm　the　fact；　and　grant　that　he　himself　was　among　those　whose　attitude　has　been　so　altered；　I　avoid　the　expression‘‘duped。''

It　is　necessary　here；　also；　to　repeat　that　the　movements　of　the　hands　and　other　gestures　of　the　witnesses　while　making　their　statements　will　help　much　to　keep　the　correct　balance。　Movements　lie　much　less　frequently　than　words。＇1＇


＇1＇　Paragraph　omitted。


Another　means　of　discovering　whether　a　witness　is　not　seduced　by　his　attitude　and　his　own　qualities　is　the　careful　observation　of　the　impression　his　narrative　makes　on　himself。　Stricker　has　controlled　the　conditions　of　speech　and　has　observed　that　so　long　as　he　continued　to　bring　clearly　described　complexes　into　a　causal　relation；　_*satisfactory　to　him_；　he　could　excite　his　auditors；　as　soon　as　he　spoke　of　a　relation　which　_*did　not_　satisfy　him　the　attitude　of　the　audience　altered。　We　must　invert　this　observation；　we　are　the　auditors　of　the　witness　and　must　observe　whether　his　own　causal　connections　satisfy　him。　So　long　as　this　is　the　case；　we　believe　him。　When　it　fails　to　be　so　he　is　either　lying；　or　he　himself　knows　that　he　is　not　expressing　himself　as　he　ought　to　make　us　correctly　understand　what　he　is　talking　about。


Section　61。　（b）　Dialect　Forms。

What　every　criminal　lawyer　must　unconditionally　know　is　the　dialect　of　those　people　he　has　most　to　deal　with。　This　is　so　important　that　I　should　hold　it　conscienceless　to　engage　in　the　profession　of　criminology　without　knowing　the　dialects。　Nobody　with　experience　would　dispute　my　assertion　that　nothing　is　the　cause　of　so　great　and　so　serious　misunderstandings；　of　even　inversions　of　justice；　as　ignorance　of　dialects；　ignorance　of　the　manner　of　expression　of　human　groups。　Wrongs　so　caused　can　never　be　rectified　because　their　primary　falsehood　starts　in　the　protocol；　where　no　denial；　no　dispute　and　redefinition　can　change　them。

It　is　no　great　difficulty　to　learn　dialects；　if　only　one　is　not　seduced　　by　comic　pride　and　foolish　ignorance　of　his　own　advantage　into　believing　that　popular　speech　is　something　low　or　common。　Dialect　has　as　many　rights　as　literary　language；　is　as　living　and　interesting　an　organism　as　the　most　developed　form　of　expression。　Once　the　interest　in　dialect　is　awakened；　all　that　is　required　is　the　learning　of　a　number　of　meanings。　Otherwise；　there　are　no　difficulties；　for　the　form　of　speech　of　the　real　peasant　（and　this　is　true　all　over　the　world）；　is　always　the　simplest；　the　most　natural；　and　the　briefest。　Tricks；　difficult　construction；　circumlocutions　are　unknown　to　the　peasant；　and　if　he　is　only　left　to　himself　he　makes　everything　definite；　clear；　and　easily　intelligible。

There　are　many　more　difficulties　in　the　forms　of　expression　of　the　uncultivated　city　man；　who　has　snapped　up　a　number　of　uncomprehended　phrases　and　tries　to　make　use　of　them　because　of　their　suppositious　beauty；　regardless　of　their　fitness。　Unpleasant　as　it　is　to　hear　such　a　screwed　and　twisted　series　of　phrases；　without　beginning　and　without　end；　it　is　equally　difficult　to　get　a　dear　notion　of　what　the　man　wanted　to　say；　and　especially　whether　the　phrases　used　were　really　brought　out　with　some　purpose　or　simply　for　the　sake　of　showing　off；　because　they　sound　‘‘educated。''

In　this　direction　nothing　is　more　significant　than　the　use　of　the　imperfect　in　countries　where　its　use　is　not　customary　and　where　as　a　rule　only　the　perfect　is　used；　not　‘‘I　was　going；''　but　‘‘I　have　gone''　（went）。　In　part　the　reading　of　newspapers；　but　partly　also　the　unfortunate　habit　of　our　school　teachers；　compel　children　to　the　use　of　the　imperfect；　which　has　not　an　iota　more　justification　than　the　perfect；　and　which　people　make　use　of　under　certain　circumstances；　i。　e。；　when　they　are　talking　to　educated　people；　and　then　only　before　they　have　reached　a　certain　age。

I　confess　that　I　regularly　mistrust　a　witness　who　makes　use　of　an　imperfect　or　some　other　form　not　habitual　to　him。　I　presuppose　that　he　is　a　weak…minded　person　who　has　allowed　himself　to　be　persuaded；　I　believe　that　he　is　not　altogether　reliable　because　he　permits　untrue　forms　to　express　his　meaning；　and　I　fear　that　he　neglects　the　content　for　the　sake　of　the　form。　The　simple　person　who　quietly　and　without　shame　makes　use　of　his　natural　dialect；　supplies　no　ground　for　mistrust。

There　are　a　few　traits　of　usage　which　must　always　be　watched。　First　of　all；　all　dialects　are　in　certain　directions　poorer　than　the　literary　language。　E。　g。；　they　make　use　of　fewer　colors。　The　blue　grape；　the　red　wine；　may　be　indicated　by　the　word　black；　the　light　　wine　by　the　word　white。　Literary　language　has　adopted　the　last　term　from　dialect。　Nobody　says　water…colored　or　yellow　wine；　although　nobody　has　ever　yet　seen　white　wine。　Similarly；　no　peasant　says　a　‘‘brown　dog；''　a　‘‘brown…yellow　cow''these　colors　are　always　denoted　by　the　word　red。　This　is　important　in　the　description　of　clothes。　There　is；　however；　no　contradiction　between　this　trait　and　the　fact　that　the　dialect　may　be　rich　in　terms　denoting　objects　that　may　be　very　useful；　e。　g。　the　handle　of　a　tool　may　be　called　handle；　grasp；　heft；　stick；　clasp；　etc。

When　foreign　words　are　used　it　is　necessary　to　observe　in　what　tendency；　and　what　meaning　their　adoption　embodies。＇1＇


＇1＇　Paragraph　omitted。


The　great　difficulty　of　getting　uneducated　people　to　give　their　testimony　in　direct　discourse　is　remarkable。　You　might　ask　for　the　words　of　the　speaker　ten　times　and　you　always　hear；　‘‘He　told　me；　I　should　enter；''　you　never　hear　‘‘He　told　me；　‘Go　in。'　''　This　is　to　be　explained　by　the　fact；　already　mentioned；　that　people　bear　in　mind　only　the　meaning　of　what　they　have　heard。　When　the　question　of　the　actual　words　is　raised；　the　sole　way　to　conquer　this　disagreeable　tendency　is　to　develop　dialogue　and　to　say　to　the　witness；　‘‘Now　you　are　A　and　I　am　B；　how　did　it　happen？''　But　even　this　device　may　fail；　and　when　you　finally　do　compel　direct　quotation；　you　can　not　be　certain　of　its　reliability；　for　it　was　too　extraordinary　for　the　witness　to　quote　directly；　and　the　extraordinary　and　unhabitual　is　always　unsafe。

What　especially　wants　consideration　in　the　real　peasant　is　his　silence。　I　do　not　know　whether　the　reasons　for　the　silence　of　the　countrymen　all　the　world　over　have　ever　been　sought；　but　a　gossiping　peasant　is　rare　to　find。　This　trait　is　unfortunately　exhibited　in　the　latter's　failure　to　defend　himself　when　we　make　use　of　energetic　investigation。　It　is　said　that　not　to　defend　yourself　is　to　show　courage；　and　this　may；　indeed；　be　a　kind　of　nobility；　a　disgust