Say and stancetaking in courtroom talk: a corpus-assisted study

Abstract

Approached as an interactional phenomenon, stance is realised through varied linguistic devices and practices which need not be overtly evaluative. Say, the basic communication verb which indicates the source of knowledge and, thus, perspectivises the information imparted by speakers, is one such resource. Its stancetaking potential is exploited, among other settings, in the courtroom or in the police interview room, where institutional authority is exerted and the facts of legal stories are ‘fixed’ and formulated ( Holt and Johnson, 2010 ; and Johnson, 2014 ). Combining corpus and discourse-analytic perspectives ( Partington et al., 2013 ), this study explores the patterns of use and distribution of the verb say in a libel trial, demonstrating its role in the interactional co-construction of stance. It also provides insight into how more powerful participants use say as a means of claiming epistemic priority and asserting authority – or more broadly, to position themselves towards less powerful speakers. The analysis focusses in particular on the role of say in ‘shifting standpoints’, ‘challenging standpoints’, ‘reality reconstruction’ and ‘standpoint continuity’.