In this chapter, I will compare two types of discursive analysis, ‘positioning theory’ and ‘narrative analysis’, that attempt to show how reference to person and self is manifested in conversation, writing and other social practices. I have selected these approaches because they are prominent, popular and influential.

Positioning theory attempts to show how the subjects of a discourse (persons, speakers, etc.) are constituted by the vocabulary, grammar and rhetorical strategies that speakers employ in their dealings with each other in various social contexts. Narrative analysis focuses more on the storylike structure of what actors are doing together, and, within this approach, a person's identity or self has also been understood as an element in a story – as a protagonist of a particular kind whose self-interpretation can be equated with the sort of plot they are enacting. In one version of the theory, a person is viewed as the storyteller who also plays a part in the story and, in another, a person's identity is interpreted as being constructed (unwittingly) as if they were a storyteller.

Before embarking upon a detailed discussion, I would like to set the scene by commenting on two well-known early theorists of self and identity, William James (1842–1910) and George H. Mead (1863–1931). Their ideas have been so influential that it is difficult to discuss a discursive approach to persons without first considering their contribution. A discussion of their ideas also highlights how a discursive approach differs from theirs.