Cover not available

Article published In: Pragmatics
Vol. 21:1 (2011) ► pp.111–125

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF

Examining the rhetorical structure and discursive features of letters of leniency as a genre

Open Access logo
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial (CC BY-NC) 4.0 license.
Published online: 1 March 2011
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.21.1.06mas
This paper presents a genre analysis of 73 letters of leniency, which were obtained in two United States federal district courthouses. The primary objective of this type of genre is to persuade a judge to be lenient during the sentencing of a defendant, such as by reducing or commuting the defendant’s sentence. This paper examines how writers of this genre structure their letters and use discursive features, in particular linguistically-realized politeness and appeals to the judges’ faith, to make a request for leniency. The findings of this study show that the rhetorical and discursive features of letters of leniency follow the conventions of the court, which demands the observance of the judge’s face through the use of politeness. This study also shows how the notion of faith is exploited in this type of genre to make a persuasive request or, more often, to follow-up a request (post-request) for leniency.
References (38)
Anthony, M., and K. Gladkov (2007) Rhetorical appeals in fundraising. In D. Biber, U. Connor & T.A. Upton (eds.), Discourse on the move using corpus analysis to describe discourse structure. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company, pp. 121-51. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. (2006) Face as relational and interactional: A communication framework for research in face, facework, and politeness. Journal of Politeness Research 21: 193-216.  BoP Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Abelen, E., G. Redeker, and S.A. Thompson (1993) The rhetorical structure of US-American and Dutch fund-raising letters. Text 13.3: 323-50.  BoP Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bargiela-Chiappini, F. (2003) Face and politeness: New (insights) for old (concepts). Journal of Pragmatics 351: 1453-69.  BoPGoogle Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bargiela-Chiappini, F., and S.J. Harris (1996) Requests and status in business correspondence. Journal of Pragmatics 281: 635-62.  BoPGoogle Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bazerman, C. (1989) Shaping Written Knowledge. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bhatia, V.K. (1993) Analysing Genre: Language Use in Professional Settings. London: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. (1998) Generic patterns in fundraising discourse. New Directions for Philanthropic Fundraising 221: 95-110. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. (2004) Worlds of Written Discourse. London: Continuum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Biber, D. (1988) Variation Across Speech and Writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.  BoPGoogle Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Biber, D., U. Connor, and T.A. Upton (2007) Discourse on the Move Using Corpus Analysis to Describe Discourse Structure. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.  BoPGoogle Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brown, P., and S. Levinson (1987) Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bruder, K.A. (1998) A pragmatics for human relationships with the divine: An examination of the monastic blessing sequence. Journal of Pragmatics 291: 463-91. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Christie, C. (2004) Introduction. Multilingual 23.1: 1-11.  MetBibGoogle Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Conley, J.M., and W. O’Barr (1998) Just Words: Law, Language, and Power. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Connor, U., and T.A. Upton (2003) Linguistic dimensions of direct mail letters. In C. Meyer & P. Leistyna (eds.), Corpus analysis: Language structure and language use. Amsterdam: Rodopi, pp. 71-87. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Eckert, P., and S. McConnell-Ginet (1992) Think practically and look locally: Language and gender as community-based practice. Annual Review of Anthropology 211: 461-90. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goffman, E. (1967) On face-work: An analysis of ritual elements in social interaction. In E. Goffman (ed.), Interaction ritual: Essays in face-to-face behavior. Chicago: Aldine, pp. 5-45.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Grice, H.P. (1975) Logic and conversation. In P. Cole & J.L. Morgan (eds.), Syntax and semantics, vol 3: Speech Acts. New York: Academic Press, pp. 41-58.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gu, Y. (1990) Politeness phenomena in modern Chinese. Journal of Pragmatics 141: 237-57.  BoPGoogle Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Haugh, M. (2003) Anticipated versus inferred politeness. Multilingua 221: 397-413.  BoPGoogle Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. (2005) The importance of 'place' in Japanese politeness: Implications for cross-cultural and intercultural analyses. Intercultural Pragmatics 2.1: 41-68. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hurd, H.M. (2007) The morality of mercy. Ohio State Journal of Criminal Law 41: 388-421.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ide, S. (1989) Formal forms of discernment: Two neglected aspects of linguistic politeness. Multilingua 81: 223-48. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ji, S. (2000) 'Face' and polite verbal behaviors in Chinese culture. Journal of Pragmatics 321: 1059-62.  BoPGoogle Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
de Kadt, E. (1998) The concept of face and it's applicability in the Zulu language. Journal of Pragmatics 291: 173-91. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kanoksilapatham, B. (2007) Introduction to move analysis. In D. Biber, U. Connor, & T.A. Upton (eds.), Discourse on the Move Using Corpus Analysis to Describe Discourse Structure. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company, pp. 23-41. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kasper, G. (1990) Linguistic politeness: Current research issues. Journal of Pragmatics 141: 193-218.  BoPGoogle Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mao, L.R. (1994) Beyond politeness theory: 'Face' revisited and renewed. Journal of Pragmatics 211: 451-86. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mills, S. (2004) Class, gender and politeness. Multilingua 231: 171-90.  BoPGoogle Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sato, S. (2008) Use of “please” in American and New Zealand English. Journal of Pragmatics 401: 1249-78. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schegloff, E. (1990) The organization of sequences as a source of coherence in talk-in-interaction. In B. Dorval (ed.), Conversational organization and its development. Norwood, N.J.: Ablex, pp. 51-77.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Swales, J.M. (1981) Aspects of Article Introductions. Aston University: Language Studies Unit.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. (1990) Genre Analysis: English in Academic and Research Settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Torre, L., and M.A. Bendixen (1988) Direct Mail Fund Raising: Letters that Work. New York: Plenum Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Upton, T.A. (2002) Understanding direct mail letters as a genre. Journal of Corpus Linguistics 7.1: 65-85. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue