Forensic Analysis of Personal Written Texts - Research Paper Example

Forensic Analysis of Personal Written Texts Forensic Analysis of Personal Written Texts Introduction As part of the course requirements, the current essay aims to establish the authorship of three texts through the forensic and linguistic analysis of these texts. Through the use of R. Eagleson’s “Forensic Analysis of Personal Written Texts” as an example, the essay would follow the same structure, in conjunction with the Longman Student Grammar of Oral and Written English and Linguistic Terms and Concepts to identify appropriate terms for the language structures that are to be encountered. Three texts are to be evaluated and analyzed in terms of determining patterns or possession of shared features by classifying the analysis under word level (demonstrative determiner, activity verb, frequently used words); clause level (sentence type, run ons and fragment, clause type, copula, preface and coordination); and whole text level (reference and rhetoric). A concluding portion would summarize the results to validate the contention to be revealed under the general analysis. Prompt The three separate and distinct texts are written by students from the class Structure of English and the task is to establish the authorship of the three texts through both linguistics and forensic analysis. The three texts are labeled as Text 1 (5), Text 2 (9) and Text 3 (5a). General Analysis The three texts are writing experiences of students taking English as Second Language course (ESL). Text 1 shared the challenges of experiencing learning in their reading classes where some suggestions for teachers’ instructional methods were provided. Text 2 was more specific in providing examples that revealed the Chinese culture from where the student apparently came from. The student who wrote Text 2 wrote using the past tense with intermittent present tenses; the punctuation marks, specifically the periods were situated in the right location, unlike the author of Text 1. Finally, the author of Text 3 situated the periods the same way as that of the author of Text 1. Further, the use of ‘skimming and scanning’ was repeated both in Text 1 and Text 3, so one surmised that Text 1 and 3 are written by the same author. Procedures After due examination and counting of linguistic features of the three texts in word, clause and whole-text level referring to the book Student Grammar of Spoken and Written English and Robert Eagleson’s Forensic Analysis of Personal Written Texts: A Case Study, a tabular representation of results that appeared in the three texts would indicate if my contentions is supported. The Evidence Word Level Demonstrative Determiner: The demonstrative determiner in Text 1 and 3 are virtually none existent; as opposed to Text 2 that used “that” thrice. Activity Verb: Another feature reflecting the different lexical choice is the use of verbs. Table 1 includes all the activity verbs from the texts. From the table, one can deduce that the use of activity verbs for Text 1 and 3 are almost the same with replicating the following activity verbs: do, read, skim, scan, guess, and practice. Text 2 used longer activity verbs such as strengthen and memorize. Table 1: Activity Verb -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- T1: use*4, practice, need, give, choose, make, teach, find, skim, scan, guess, do*2, follow, read, figure, check, improve --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- T2: show, work, recall, find, look, come, show, start, help, strengthen, talk, memorize, add, create, go --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- T3: deal, understand, read*5, figure, guess, answer, practice, understand, try*3, do, face, find, se, participate, work, skim, scan, waste ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Frequently Used Words: For Text 1 and 3, it is surprising that the frequently used words are as follows: reading (or read), passages, students and teachers. For Text 1, the word ‘student’ was used 13 times. For Text 2, the frequently used word is predominantly food, the topic for the essay, which was used eight times. Clause Level Sentence Type: Text 1 uses both simple and compound complex sentences, with more compound complex sentences occurring more frequently. Text 2 uses simple sentences with intermittent complex sentences. Text 3 on the other hand uses simple sentences more frequently than complex sentences or compound complex sentences. Table 2 summarizes the analysis of sentence type of Text 1, 2 and 3: Table 2: Sentence Type T1 T2 T3 Simple Sentences 2 5 6 Compound Sentences 1 7 5 Complex Sentences 3 1 4 Compound-Complex Sentences 4 0 2 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Run-Ons and Fragments: Text 1 and 3 manifests the emergence of run-ons and fragments exhibited through several mistakes: the use of contractions ‘didn’t’ appeared both in Text 1 and 3. Clause Type: Text 1 evidently showed longer clauses than both Text 2 and 3. Text 2 used simpler and shorter clauses. Text 3 likewise uses simpler and shorter clauses with intermittent long clauses at the middle of the discourse. Copula: Text 1, 2 and 3 have more copulas in use and the structure subject +verb +subject predicative is more frequently used than the structure subject +verb +adjective, as summarized below: Table 3: The Structure of Copula T1 T2 T3 Copula (be, were, is, are) 15 16 17 S+v+sp 11 14 16 S+v+a 3 2 1 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Preface: The use of prefaces were more pronounced in Text 3 where the author used the follow at the start of the sentence: ‘Besides’ (twice), ‘Actually’, and ‘By the time’. No preface was used in Text 2; while two prefaces were used in Text 1 (‘For example’, and ‘Also’. Coordination: The coordination conjunction “and” linking independent clauses appears more frequently in Text 1 (9 times) than that in Text 2 and 3 (3 times and 5 times, respectively) such as “lf the students do their job properly and the teacher check the students work and give feedback ,l think the student will get the benefit of the reading class and improve their level of this language skill” found in Text 1. Whole Text Level Reference: Text 1 has diverse referential pronoun string: ranging from using the first person to the third person and changing to second person. Text 2 used more consistent referential person string. Text 3, like Text 1 changes first, to second to third person intermittently. Rhetoric: All texts are in descriptive, narrative form relaying and sharing personal experiences, providing suggestions and indicating observations from other students, as points of perspectives for the English as Second Language course. Conclusion Table 4: Summary of the features T1 T2 T3 Word Level Demonstrative determiners + - + Activity verbs + - + Frequently used words + - + Clause Level Tense + - + Sentence types - - - Clause type - - - Run-on & fragments + - + Copula - - - Preface + - + Coordination - + + Whole Text Level Reference + - + Rhetoric + + + Notes: “+”shows the possession of shared features; “-”means the absence of shared features The forensic analysis of personal written texts through closer evaluation of patterns or possession of shared features under word level (demonstrative determiner, activity verb, frequently used words); clause level (sentence type, run ons and fragment, clause type, copula, preface and coordination); and whole text level (reference and rhetoric) revealed that there were eminent similarities and shared features between the author of Text1 and Text 3. After the analysis of the three texts on the word, clause and whole-text levels, Text 1 and 3 appear to be written by the same author. There were apparent similarities in features, word pattern, activity verbs, frequently used words, and other referential pronoun string. Further the error in the placement of the period, appearing one space after the end of the sentence appeared both in Text 1 and 3. In addition, the words skimming and scanning, which appeared in Text 1, also appeared in Text 3. Overall, the summarized results shown in Table 4 showed eight predominant shared features for Text 1 and Text 3, thereby supporting one’s initial contention. Read More