THE WEAPONIZATION OF WORDS: CALUMNIOUS UTTERANCES IN JOHNNY DEPP AND AMBER HEARD'S TRIAL SPEECHES FROM A PRAGMATIC PERSPECTIVE

Abstract

This study approaches calumnious utterances from a pragmatic perspective, focusing on its use in the highly publicized legal case between Johnny Depp and Amber Heard. The trial, rich in media coverage and public scrutiny, presents a compelling context to examine how language can be used as a weapon in legal and interpersonal conflicts. Despite its relevance, the concept of calumny has received limited academic attention, particularly in the field of pragmatics. To address this research gap, the study investigates the pragmatic mechanisms behind calumnious speech by analysing selected utterances from the trial discourse. To support this investigation, the study includes a review of literature relevant to calumny and its related concepts, such as misrepresentation and reputational damage. This theoretical framework helps clarify how such speech acts operate within broader communicative and social structures. In conclusion, this research aims to deepen the understanding of calumny as a communicative concept, emphasizing its role in shaping public narratives, influencing legal outcomes, and revealing how language can be used to manipulate, accuse, and harm in high-stakes contexts