Abstract
This study explores the ways in which lawyers perform relational work with jurors in an understudied area of courtroom discourse, the closing argument (Rosulek, 2015). Incorporating the concept of engagement (Hyland, 2001, 2005), the qualitative analysis focuses on the form and functions of addressee features, including pronominal choices, questions, directives, references to shared knowledge, and asides. The findings reveal that these features not merely foster solidarity and enhance interpersonal relations between addresser and addressee, but also constitute a key way to the meaning-making process. The findings attest to the centrality of interpersonal negotiation in institutional discourse.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
