Linguistics isn’t always thought to be the sexiest of topics — yet discussion of pronouns is everywhere right now. If you’ve clicked here hoping for a discussion about gender politics, this post probably isn’t for you, although I’d love it if you stuck around. This post is about empathy and empowerment. It is about talk in therapy and counselling. It asks how personal pronouns are used by therapists and clients to build empathy and empowerment together.
First, some terminology…
I’m going to talk about first-person, and second-person, pronouns in this blog. In case you can’t recall the two minutes of that English class you had twenty odd years ago, here is a reminder.
First-person pronouns — I, me, we, and so on
Second-person pronouns — You, yourself, and so on.
There are others — but these are the ones we will focus on right now.
What do the experts say about pronoun use in psychotherapy?
Personal pronoun use in person-centred therapy has had a little attention so far. Following an analysis of Carl Rogers’s (the founder of person-centred therapy), academics suggested that Rogers used ‘I’ to speak ‘as himself’ at the beginning of transcripts, used ‘we’ around the middle points to speak in union with the client, and ‘I’ to speak as though he was the client. He ended, they say, by using ‘you’ to indicate client separation.
Why does this matter? The idea here is that Rogers produced a ‘gold standard’ of therapeutic communication by using pronouns to indicate that the client was separate to him at the start and beginning of therapy sessions overall. The use of ‘I’ as himself at the start was because an empathic relationship had yet to be built. The use of ‘I’ as himself, and ‘you’ at the end of the sessions was used to show distance as the client was hoped to rely on their ‘internal locus of control,’ by this stage. That’s person-centred therapy jargon which means that the client should use their own judgements about how to live — not be reliant on what anybody else thinks, including the therapist. This is empowering for the client as it allows them to live authentically.
I found no evidence that this happens
I also didn’t find any suggestion that the client uses personal pronouns in any way that is linked to empathy or empowerment. Their use of pronouns was much the same throughout.
Of course, it could be that the therapists I analysed just preferred not to use these pronouns and that they are widely used elsewhere. Or maybe more therapists should follow Rogers’ lead if he is the ‘gold standard’ of person-centred therapy.
The therapist using first-person pronouns (mostly ‘I’) to speak as though they are the client speaking as themselves was prevalent, however. That’s a ‘bit of a mouthful’ so I’ll give an (imagined) example,
Client: I can’t believe she’d say that about me! I’m not rude. It’s just so unfair.
Therapist: It’s almost like you want to say to her, “I’m not a rude person — that’s not fair or true at all!”
Now, if you’ve read my ‘reformulations’ blog, you’ll probably be thinking ‘hm that rings a bell — what does it mean in terms of reformulations?’ And if you’ve read my ‘metaphor’ blog you’ll be thinking, ‘oh no, another metaphor!’ I’ll discuss how I found pronouns and reformulations relate in a future blog post, so bear with me for now.
In the example above, the therapist is speaking as if they are the client in the ‘I’m not a rude person’ — I’ve added that in bold for you above.
Why would the therapist use first-person pronouns to speak as though they are the client?
This has been explained in terms of empathy. The therapist is speaking ‘as if’ they are the client to communicate their feelings of empathy and, more specifically, their empathic understanding of the client’s feelings and emotions to the client. The theory goes that this allows the client to ‘hear’ their ‘own’ thoughts from an external point of view. This helps the client to understand that they are understood (if, indeed, they are), so contributes to empathic communication between the therapist and client.
I agree with this finding but I think this also serves another function, which I relate to client empowerment and politeness.
First-person pronoun use, politeness, and empowerment
The therapist often responds to the client referring to something critical about themselves by using this first-person pronoun to speak as if the client strategy. A nice way to consider linguistics when analysing interactions is to think about alternative responses to client speech. In the example above, the therapist could have said,
Client: I can’t believe she’d say that about me! I’m not rude. It’s just so unfair.
Therapist: How could they say something so beastly about you!
Or, perhaps..
Therapist: Well, they have a point — you’ve been pissing me off with your rudeness this whole time.
If the therapist responded like this, they might achieve a fleeting moment of catharsis, or they might have a real ‘oops, did I say that out loud?’ moment and feel guilty afterwards. Or they might have a self-satisfied feeling from ‘being a nice person.’ Or, or, or…
But, returning to real life, why would they not respond in this way? It would be inappropriate, right? In person-centred therapy these would be problematic responses because they encourage the client to value the therapist’s own opinion about them rather than their own. In fact, the client might even have made the comment because they were hoping for some such response (the first response, presumably — although sometimes not).
In other words, by using first-person pronouns in this way, the therapist can avoid giving their own opinion by redirecting the comment to the client. It’s quite a clever response as it allows the therapist to show 1) they understand the client and, 2) the client has the power to consider what has been said, independent of the therapist.
It also helps the therapist avoid being impolite and potentially causing offence or embarrassment. It does so by bringing in the other person — and reflecting the client’s expressed feelings about them — so, you seem to want to say this to them… This could be particularly empowering for the client who feels this is not a socially acceptable response so they should not ‘voice’ these feelings themselves, which could happen for several reasons — I’m sure you can think of some. One example might be because the client feels it would be impolite to criticise the therapist themselves.
How therapists can use first-person pronouns to speak as though the client to be critical about therapy
Being annoyed at the other person at some point is pretty standard in most longer-term relationships. Why would therapy be any different? You may be able to tell your friend, partner, family member, and so on, that they have irritated you. A speedy apology might happen or you may have a longer argument — either way, this type of discussion may lead to resolution and help strengthen and continue your relationship. This is hardly news, right? Voicing irritation, disagreement, disapproval, and all those negative human emotions about the other person may be encouraged in therapy but is, perhaps, less likely to happen than in other relationships.
The strategy of the therapist using a first-person pronoun to speak as if they are the client can help overcome this. Imagine you are a therapist (perhaps you don’t have to imagine…) and you sense the client you are working with is frustrated and you wonder whether it is about therapy or because of something you have said or not said. You could be directive and ask them,
Therapist: Are you annoyed at me? Is something upsetting you?
Or you could say something like,
Therapist: It’s almost like you’re saying, “I am so annoyed that this person does not get me at all” or “I hate this stupid therapy.”
The first, direct response could lead to awkwardness — the client may just outright disagree, maybe to be polite,
Client: No, of course not.
But by speaking as though you are the client, you allow the client to also understand that responding by saying these words is acceptable. This also helps the attempts to keep the relationship equal as it leads the client to feel their feelings can be considered in an equal way that the therapists’ have been. Arguably, this may also give the submissive or underconfident client a ‘template’ for how they can speak to others who are upsetting them.
