Abstract
In a courtroom setting, language plays a pivotal role in the trial process, serving as a powerful
tool for presenting cases, examining witnesses, and persuading judges or juries regarding the
guilt or innocence of the defendants facing charges. While previous research, such as studies
by Drew (1992), Matoesian (1993), and Cotterill (2004), has predominantly focused on
witness examination within courtroom discourse, there has been a notable dearth of studies
delving into the language employed by lawyers during closing arguments (Rosulek, 2009).
This study addresses the identified research gap by shedding light on the language of closing
arguments, a critical phase of legal proceedings where opposing lawyers directly address the
jury.
During closing statements, lawyers endeavour to convince jurors that their version of events
holds greater plausibility than that presented by opposing counsel, with the ultimate goal of
securing a favourable verdict. This thesis employs a combination of Corpus Linguistics and
Discourse analytical frameworks, to investigate lexico-grammatical features by analysing the
frequencies, collocations, and concordances within the closing arguments and explore specific
prominent features that contribute to the construction of lawyers' language during closing
arguments as well as the distinct linguistic persuasive strategies employed by the opposing
prosecution and defence. This study also uses move analysis, uncovering genre-based moves
that shed light on the different strategies opposing parties use during their closing statements.
The findings reveal that, in the realm of closing arguments, language predominantly adopts a
plain and accessible style, with minimal use of legalese jargon, primarily restricted to
case-specific terminology. The study unveils the prevalence of specific parts of speech features
within pronouns, nouns, verbs, and adverbs, and establishes their connections to persuasive
strategies related to inclusiveness and otherness, the role of social actors, and the framing of
arguments. Furthermore, the results unveil a diverse array of rhetorical strategies, with a
particular focus on the consistent use of rhetorical questions throughout the closing
statements. Moreover, the analysis of the genre moves provides insights into a potential
overarching structure, despite variations in case specifics and argument lengths. This structure
encompasses a universal tripartite format observed on both sides and distinct moves for each
party ranging from appreciative and dramatic openings to the ultimate demands or requests
for a favourable verdict.