English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Based on the engagement system in Appraisal Theory and taking 100 Chinese criminal judgments as data, this paper analyzes the distribution features and interpersonal functions of engagement resources in Chinese criminal judgments. The findings are as follows. First, in Chinese criminal judgments, dialogic contractive resources outnumber dialogic expansive ones. Of the nine types of engagement resources, Deny takes the largest proportion. Entertain, Acknowledge, Pronounce, and Endorse are also favored by judges, while Counter, Endorse+Pronounce, Concede, Endorse+Acknowledge, and Distance are much less favored. Second, the dialogic space is adjusted in different parts of judgments due to different engagement strategies, narrowing down in the Head, Fact, and Reason parts, then nearly closing up in the Result part, and finally opening up in the Ending part. Third, Deny, Pronounce, Endorse+Pronounce, Endorse, and Distance are used to show that criminal judgments are just, authoritative, persuasive, and compulsory. By acknowledging the arguments and submissions that have been presented, judges are showing respect for the litigation rights of the various parties, while the featured strategies of Counter, Concede, and Entertain increase the acceptability of the judgments.

Engagement in Chinese criminal judgments