Functions of Names in Capital Trials

Abstract

Viewing every linguistic act as involving choices, this study seeks to understand how naming choices reflect and aid in realizing the ideological positions of language users in institutional discourse. Drawing upon ten opening addresses from the penalty phase of capital trials, the quantitative and qualitative analysis identifies the forms, functions and frequencies of names that lawyers use to refer to the defendants and victims in their speeches. The findings reveal that the two sides differ starkly in terms of naming choices and purposes for which names are used (or not used). Such systematic differences contribute to shaping interpersonal relationships between the trial participants (the jurors, the defendants and the lawyers) and partly constructing aggravating and mitigating circumstances for the person on trial and his impending sentence.