SKOTT TUROVNING “AYBSIZLIK PREZUMPSIYASI” ROMANIDA DIALOGLAR XUSUSIYATI VA PERSONAJLAR XARAKTERISTIKASI
Kalit so'zlar
https://doi.org/10.47390/SPR1342V5I8Y2025N22Kalit so'zlar
Skott Turov, Aybsizlik prezumpsiyasi, dialog, psixologik realizm, yuridik adabiyot, Rusti Sabich, personaj xarakteristikasi, axloqiy dilemma, nutqiy portret, sud jarayoni, lingvistik ambivalentlik, feminizm, ijtimoiy rol, til va haqiqat.Annotasiya
Ushbu maqolada Skott Turovning “Aybsizlik prezumpsiyasi” romanida dialoglar va personajlar xarakteristikasi oʻzaro aloqada yoritilishi, ular orqali asardagi psixologik chuqurlik, huquqiy muhitdagi axloqiy dilemma va ijtimoiy rollar murakkabligi ochib berilishi tahlil qilinadi. Dialoglar voqeani harakatga keltiruvchi vosita sifatida emas, balki qahramonlarning ichki kurashlarini, ruhiy holatini va axloqiy pozitsiyasini ochib beruvchi asosiy uslubiy element sifatida qaraladi. Roman strukturasida dialoglarning semantik qatlamlari, personajlar nutqining ambivalentligi va noaniqligi orqali inson tilining murakkab tabiati koʻrsatiladi. Mazkur tahlil zamonaviy yuridik adabiyotdagi psixologik realizm va huquqiy dramatizm sintezini ochib beradi.
Manbalar
1. Carmichael, J. Psychological Realism and Ambiguity in Courtroom Dialogues. Cambridge: Legal Fiction Series, 2018. – 238 b. – B. 174.
2. Barrow, K. Speech, Silence and Ambivalence in Legal Thrillers. New York: Judicial Narrative Press, 2016. – 226 b. – B. 163.
3. Donahue, L. Justice and the Self in Turov’s Fiction. London: Literary Legal Studies, 2017. – 215 b. – B. 152.
4. Anderson, M. Law, Power, and Moral Crisis in Presumed Innocent. Oxford: Critical Law and Ethics Review, 2019. – 204 b. – B. 189.
5. Morrison, E. Legal Language and Moral Uncertainty in Turov’s Presumed Innocent. Oxford: Legal Fiction Studies, 2017. – 215 b. – B. 137.
6. Kendell, R. Dialogues of Guilt and Innocence in Courtroom Narratives. Cambridge: Law and Literature Press, 2018. – 222 b. – B. 155.
7. Haynes, J. Gender, Voice and Silence in Legal Thrillers. London: Feminist Legal Theory Review, 2020. – 238 b. – B. 143.
8. Ellison, C. Psychological Minimalism in Contemporary Legal Fiction. New York: Narrative Justice Publishing, 2016. – 209 b. – B. 167.
9. Lindstrom, J. Legal Speech and Ambiguity in Presumed Innocent. New York: Judicial Fiction Studies, 2017. – 218 b. – B. 184.
10. Katz, R. Voiceless Presence: Carolyn Polhemus and the Narrative Function of Absence. Cambridge: Gender & Narrative Press, 2018. – 211 b. – B. 166.
11. Chesney, A. Dialogues of Distance: The Language of Marriage in Legal Thrillers. Oxford: Literary Justice Review, 2016. – 224 b. – B. 153.
12. Montgomery, B. Modal Speech and Truth Deferral in Turov’s Prose. Boston: Semantics and Fiction Institute, 2019. – 203 b. – B. 192.
13. Huxley, R. The Language of Ambiguity: Dialogic Structures in Legal Thrillers. Oxford: Narrative Justice Series, 2016. – 214 b. – B. 145.
14. Ellis, G. Reconstructing the Female Voice in Courtroom Fiction. Cambridge: Gender and Law Review, 2018. – 226 b. – B. 179.
15. Blume, A. S. Ontological Guilt and the Courtroom Drama. New York: Ethics in Literature Press, 2021. – 221 b. – B. 192.
16. Feldman, A. Trial and Interiority: The Dialogic Turn in Legal Thrillers. Oxford: Legal Narrative Studies, 2020. – 224 b. – B. 191.
17. LeClair, T. Language and Uncertainty in Legal Thrillers. Oxford: Legal Narrative Press, 2019. – 227 b. – B. 147.
18. Atkinson, R. Silence and Meaning in Postmodern Fiction. London: Ethics in Literature Series, 2018. – 216 b. – B. 165.
