Abstract

Viewing pronouns as central to self/other positioning and meaning making, this study explores pragmatic manipulations of self-reference pronouns in the context of the penalty phase of capital trials. Based on a corpus of ten closing arguments, the findings indicate that first-person pronouns play a crucial role in allowing lawyers to subtly shift between various speaking roles. In this dynamic process, lawyers construct a multiplicity of selves or footing as they attempt to align the jurors with their positions on the death sentence. In effect, first-person pronouns become a powerful means of mediating capital jurors’ perceptions and experiences in deciding whether the defendant should live or die.