This study seeks to examine how the use of names serves to accomplish the process of identity construction in institutional discourse. Drawing upon six opening addresses from three high-profile trials, the study analyzes the forms, functions, and frequency of names that lawyers use to refer to defendants and victims in their narratives. The quantitative and qualitative analysis reveals that the prosecution and the defense differ starkly in how they use names to construct the identities of the characters. Such systematic differences contribute to ascribing polarized identities to the characters, which in effect negotiates reality by (de)legitimizing guilt and responsibility claims and mediating jurors’ perceptions.

本研究旨在探讨名称的使用如何在制度化话语中完成身份建构的过程。这项研究利用了三项引人注目的审判中的六个开场白，分析了律师在其叙述中用来指称被告和被害人的姓名的形式，功能和频率。定量和定性分析表明，起诉方和辩方在使用姓名来构造角色的身份上有着明显的不同。这种系统的差异有助于赋予角色以两极分化的身份，这实际上是通过（使）罪恶和责任主张合法化和调解陪审员的看法来协商现实。