Group items tagged

Twitter is awash with trolls, spammers and misanthropes, all keen to ruin your day with a mean-spirited message or even a threat that can cause you genuine fear. It seems all too easy to set up an account and cause trouble anonymously, but an emerging field of research is making it easier to track perpetrators by looking at the way they use language when they chat.

All the technology in the world can't stop you from leaving a trail behind you when you broadcast your thoughts online or via text message. We all have individual writing styles and habits that build to create a linguistic identity. Forensic linguistic experts can penetrate technological anonymity by interrogating the linguistic clues that you leave as you write. Everything from the way someone uses capitalisation or personal pronouns, to the words someone typically omits or includes, to a breakdown of average word or sentence length, can help identify the writer of even a short text like a Tweet or text message.

forensic linguistics videos

Interesting article/interview with a forensic linguist gives insight into how exactly they catch criminals.

Want to Study Forensic Linguistics in college?

Thanks to Jesse Huang for this article, which discusses the recent shooting and killing of Trayvon Martin by George Zimmerman, a Neighborhood Watch member, and the ensuing investigation as to whether the shooting was done in self-defense. Using software that examines characteristics like pitch and the space between spoken words to analyze voices, forensic audio experts are comparing a 911 call to a previous voice recording of Zimmerman and attempting to determine whether the background screams are that of Martin or Zimmerman. The article also includes discussion as to the reliability of this type of "voiceprint" analysis.

James Harbeck talks about how your writing is kind of like your own fingerprint or DNA and how forensics can be able to identify a certain author. Whether it be using the same words or similar ideas, itʻs kind of like your own linguistic DNA. However, it is not that simple and there has to be extensive investigation, we are slowly getting better at figuring out anonymous authors like the resistance against President Trump.

Ever used an emoji before? Most people have used an emoji in a text or message if they have a phone or laptop. The majority of emoji users are pretty harmless with the meaning behind the use of words. However not all have used it so positively. In fact, more and more law systems are bringing in linguist (emoji) experts as a witness to testify the meaning behind emojis given the context. Which is even more interesting is that some defendants have been convicted partially based on the meaning behind an emoji. For example there is one man who was convicted because of his use of a gun emoji which the expert witness testified the sinical, threatening meaning of the emoji. This article might make you think before you send your next emoji...

Article talks about the growing field of forensic linguistics: that is, the study of language to identify who said or wrote that verbal sample. Applications are enormous, from evaluating the identity of potential asylum seekers to pinpointing the Unabomber or perpetrators of crimes where language data is involved, but critics maintain that computer scans alone to evaluate language are insufficient and that overreliance can pose dangers.

Insecurity has several linguistic calling cards, and learning to spot them may help you both assuage others and more skillfully present yourself to the world. People at the edges of a given group are more likely to use language that emphasizes their membership in the group. Central figures are less likely to assert their belonging. Also signs of insecurity: a focus on the pronoun "me", borrowing prestige by using a different conversational style, and hypercorrection.

"When legal teams need to prove or disprove the authorship of key texts, they call in the forensic linguists. Scholars in the field have tackled the disputed origins of some prestigious works, from Shakespearean sonnets to the Federalist Papers. But how reliably can linguistic experts establish that Person A wrote Document X when Document X is an e-mail - or worse, a terse note sent by instant message or Twitter? After all, e-mails and their ilk give us a much more limited purchase on an author's idiosyncrasies than an extended work of literature. Does digital writing leave fingerprints?"

A team of researchers at the Cincinnati Children's Hospital use computers to analyze the language of suicide notes, in the hope that they can better identify those at risk. By comparing patient interview responses to suicide notes, they can identify how similar or divergent their language is from the language of suicide.Here are three patterns researchers have identified in their corpus of authentic suicide notes: 1. Loss of hope. When hope is gone, when hopelessness emerges - and that's in most of the notes 2. Practical instruction, e.g.. "Remember to change the tires. Remember to change the oil. I drew a check, but I didn't put the money in. Please go ahead and make the deposit." 3. The presence of the following emotions: depression, a little bit of anger, abandonment, and the sense of "I just can't go on any longer. I can't deal with this any longer."

The hallmark of President Trump's Twitter feed is that it sounds like him - grammatical miscues and all. But it's not always Trump tapping out a Tweet, even when it sounds like his voice. West Wing employees who draft proposed tweets intentionally employ suspect grammar and staccato syntax in order to mimic the president's style, according to two people familiar with the process. They overuse the exclamation point! They Capitalize random words for emphasis. Fragments. Loosely connected ideas. Trump's staff has become so adept at replicating the President's tone that people who follow his feed closely say it is getting harder to discern which tweets were actually crafted by Trump sitting in his bathrobe and watching "Fox & Friends" and which were concocted by his communications team. Staff-written tweets do go through a West Wing process of sorts. When a White House employee wants the president to tweet about a topic, the official writes a memo to the president that includes three or four sample tweets, according to those familiar with the process. Those familiar with the process wouldn't fess up to which tweets were staff-written. But an algorithm crafted by a writer at The Atlantic to determine real versus staff-written tweets suggested several were not written by the president, despite the unusual use of the language.