Cover not available
Part of
The Pragmatics of Personal Pronouns
Edited by Laure Gardelle and Sandrine Sorlin
[Studies in Language Companion Series 171] 2015
► pp. 105–124

Chapter 6. ‘You’ and ‘I’ in charity fundraising appeals

| Oxford Brookes University

The second person pronoun has become significantly more prevalent in UK charity fundraising discourse in the last five years. The effectiveness of ‘you’ in this context, to address and engage the reader and to elicit donations, is as yet under-researched. This chapter draws on theoretical developments and empirical research in literary narratology, linguistics and psycholinguistics to investigate the deictic functioning of ‘you’ and ‘I’ in fundraising mailshots. Deictic shift theory is used to explore the relative ease or difficulty with which the reader can conceptually adopt the position of the addressee in the light of Benveniste’s notion of the interdependence of ‘I’ and ‘you’. Herman’s categories of use of ‘you’ in fiction and Kacandes’ concept of the literary performative ‘you’ are drawn upon to explicate the nuances of the ontological issues involved. The chapter proposes a linguistic means by which the identificatory engagement effects of the ‘you’ in fundraising discourse may be better controlled and enhanced.

Published online: 10 November 2015
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.171.06mac
References
Bell, Alice & Ensslin, Astrid
2011 “I know what it was. You know what it was”: Second-person narration in hypertext fiction. Narrative 19(3): 311-329. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Benveniste, Émile
1971 Problems in General Linguistics, Mary Elizabeth Meek (transl.). Coral Gables FL: University of Miami Press.Google Scholar
Bhatia, Vijay K
1998 Generic patterns in fundraising discourse. New Directions for Philanthropic Discourse 22: 95-110. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Black, John B., Turner, Terrence J. & Bower, Gordon H
1979 Point of view in narrative comprehension, memory, and production. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behaviour 18: 187-198 DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brunyé, Tad T., Ditman, Tali, Mahoney, Caroline, R., Augustyn, Jason S. & Taylor, Holly A
2009 When you and I share perspectives. Pronouns modulate perspective taking during narrative comprehension. Psychological Science 20: 27-32. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brunyé, Tad T., Ditman, Tali, Mahoney, Caroline, R. & Taylor, Holly A
2011 Better you than I: Perspectives and emotion simulation during narrative comprehension. Journal of Cognitive Psychology 23: 659-666. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bühler, Karl
1934 Sprachtheorie: Die darstellungfunktion der sprache. Jena: Gustav Fischer.Google Scholar
Bucholtz, Mary & Hall, Kira
2005 Identity and interaction: A sociocultural linguistic approach. Discourse Studies 7(4–5): 585–614. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chang, Chingching
2011 Enhancing self-referencing to health messages. Journal of Consumer Affairs 45(1): 147-164. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chilton, Paul
2004 Analysing Political Discourse: Theory and Practice. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Connor, Ulla & Gladkov, Kostya
2004 Rhetorical appeals in fundraising direct mail letters. In Discourse in the Professions: Perspectives from Corpus Linguistics [Studies in Corpus Linguistics 16], Ulla Connor & Thomas A. Upton (eds), 257-286. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Connor, Ulla & Upton, Thomas
2003 Linguistic dimensions of direct mail letters. In Corpus Analysis: Language Structure and Language Use, Pepi Leistyna & Charles F. Meyer (eds), 71-86. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
Crismore, Avon
2004 Pronouns and metadiscourse as interpersonal rhetorical devices in fundraising letters: A corpus analysis. In Discourse in the Professions: Perspectives from Corpus Linguistics [Studies in Corpus Linguistics 16], Ulla Connor & Thomas A. Upton (eds), 307-330. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Das, Enny, Kerkhof, Peter, & Kuiper, Joyce
2008 Improving the effectiveness of fundraising messages: The impact of charity goal attainment, message framing, and evidence on persuasion. Journal of Applied Communication Research 36(2): 161-175. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ditman, Tali, Brunyé, Tad T., Mahoney, Caroline, R. & Taylor, Holly A
2010 Simulating an enactment effect: Pronouns guide action simulation during narrative comprehension. Cognition 115: 172-178. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Duchan, Judith F., Bruder, Gail A. & Hewitt, Lynne E
(eds) 1995 Deixis in Narrative: A Cognitive Scientific Perspective. Hillsdale NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Fairclough, Norman
2001 Language and Power, 2nd edn. Essex: Longman.Google Scholar
Fludernik, Monika
1995 Pronouns of address and ‘odd’ third person forms: The mechanics of involvement in fiction. In New Essays in Deixis: Discourse, Narrative, Literature, Keith Green (ed.), 99-129. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
Fairclough, Norman
1995 Media Discourse. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
2001 Language and Power, 2nd edn. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Fetzer, Anita & Bull, Peter
2008 Well, I answer it by simply inviting you to look at the evidence’: The strategic use of pronouns in political interviews. Journal of Language and Politics 7(2): 271–289. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fludernik, Monika
1994 Second-person narrative and related issues. Style 28: 281-311.Google Scholar
Goering, Elizabeth, Connor, Ulla M., Nagelhout, Ed, & Steinberg, Richard
2009 Persuasion in fundraising letters: An interdisciplinary study. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly 40(2): 228-246. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goffman, Erving
1981 Footing. In Forms of Talk, Erving Goffman (ed.), 124-159. Philadelphia PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Herman, David
2002 Story Logic: Problems and Possibilities of Narrative. Lincoln NB: University of Nebraska Press.Google Scholar
1994 Textual you and double deixis in Edna O’Brien’s A Pagan Place . Style 28(3): 378-410Google Scholar
Kacandes, Irene
1993 Are you in the text? The ‘literary performative’ in postmodernist fiction. Text and Performance Quarterly 13(2): 139-153. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mann, William C. & Thompson, Sandra A
(eds) 1992 Discourse Description: Diverse Linguistics Analyses of a Fund-raising Text [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 16]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Macrae, Andrea
2012 Readerly deictic shifting to and through I and you: An updated hypothesis. In Texts and Minds: Papers in Cognitive Poetics and Rhetoric [Łódź Studies in Language Series 26], Alina Kwaitkowska (ed.), 41-56. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
McHale, Brian
1992 Constructing Postmodernism. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
1987 Postmodernist Fiction. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mulhaüsler, Peter, & Harré, H. Rom
1990 People and Pronouns: The Linguistic Construction of Social and Personal Identity. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Pennebaker, James W
2011 The Secret Life of Pronouns. What Our Words Say About Us. New York NY: Bloomsbury Press.Google Scholar
Phelan, James
1994 Self-help for narrate and narrative audience: How ‘I’ – and ‘you’? – read ‘How’. Style 28: 350-365.Google Scholar
Richardson, Brian
2006 Unnatural Voices: Extreme Narration in Modern and Contemporary Fiction. Columbus OH: The Ohio State University Press.Google Scholar
Ryan, Marie-Laure
2001 Narrative as Virtual Reality. Baltimore MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Sanford, Anthony J. & Emmott, Catherine
2012 Mind, Brain and Narrative. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Talbot, Mary
1995 A synthetic sisterhood: False friends in a teenage magazine. In Gender Articulated: Language and the Socially Constructed Self, Kira Hall & Mary Bucholtz (eds), 143-165. New York NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Trush, Tom
2012 The You Effect: How to Transform Ego-Based Marketing in Captivating Messages that Create Customers. Seattle WA: CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform.Google Scholar
van Dijk, Teun A
2009 Critical discourse studies: A sociocognitive approach. In Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis, Ruth Wodak & Michael Meyer (eds), 62-86. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Wales, Katie
1996 Personal Pronouns in Present-Day English. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Warwick, Mal & Overman Eric
2013 Ninety ways to use the word ‘you’ in a fundraising appeal. In How to Write Successful Fundraising Appeals, 3rd edn, 331-334. San Francisco CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
Yates, Scott & Hiles, Dave
2010 ‘You can’t’ but ‘I do’: Rules, ethics and the significance of shifts in pronominal forms for self-positioning in talk. Discourse Studies 12(4):535-551. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zupnik, Yael-Janette
1994 Pragmatics, deixis and political discourse. Journal of Pragmatics 21: 339-383. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 6 other publications

Montoro, Rocío
2016. The year’s work in stylistics 2015. Language and Literature: International Journal of Stylistics 25:4 ► pp. 376 ff. DOI logo
Peikola, Matti
2020. Chapter 8. Patterns of reader involvement on sixteenth-century English title pages, with special reference to second-person pronouns. In Voices Past and Present - Studies of Involved, Speech-related and Spoken Texts [Studies in Corpus Linguistics, 97], ► pp. 114 ff. DOI logo
Rembowska-Płuciennik, Magdalena
2018. Second-person narration as a joint action. Language and Literature: International Journal of Stylistics 27:3 ► pp. 159 ff. DOI logo
Schoenmakers, Gert-Jan, Jihane Hachimi & Helen de Hoop
2024. Can You Make a Difference? The Use of (In)Formal Address Pronouns in Advertisement Slogans. Journal of International Consumer Marketing 36:2 ► pp. 99 ff. DOI logo
Smyreck, Ralph
2019. Wenn das Produkt zum Flirt wird – multimodale Textualität am Beispiel von In-App-Werbung bei Tinder. Lebende Sprachen 64:2 ► pp. 435 ff. DOI logo
Sorlin, Sandrine
2024.  You as a stylistic vector of otherness: from self-ascription to enactment in Kincaid (1988), Adichie (2009) and Azumah Nelson (2021). Journal of Literary Semantics 53:1 ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 20 april 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.