Academic attribution: Citation and the construction of disciplinary knowledge

Applied Linguistics

Volumn 20, Issue 3, 1999, Pages 341-367

  Hyland, Ken ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0033192378     PISSN: 01426001     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/applin/20.3.341     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Atkinson, D. 1996. 'The philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London, 1675-1975: A sociohistorical discourse analysis.' Language in Society 25: 333-71.
2. Bazerman, C. 1988. Shaping Written Knowledge. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
3. Becher, T. 1989. Academic Tribes and Territories: Intellectual Inquiry and the Cultures of Disciplines. Milton Keynes, SRHE/Open University Press.
4. Berkenkotter, C. and T. Huckin. 1995. Genre Knowledge in Disciplinary Communication. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
5. Bloor, T. 1996. 'Three hypothetical strategies in philosophical writing' in E. Ventola and A. Mauranen (eds.): Academic Writing: Intercultural and Textual Issues. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 19-43.
6. Bruffee, K. 1986. 'Social construction: language and the authority of knowledge. A bibliographical essay.' College English 48: 773-9.
7. Chargaff, E. 1974. 'Building the tower of Babel.' Nature 248: 778.
8. Crismore, A. and R. Farnsworth. 1990. 'Metadiscourse in popular and professional discourse' in W. Nash (ed.): The Writing Scholar: Studies in the Language and Conventions of Academic Discourse. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. 118-36.
9. Dubois, B. 1988. 'Citation in biomedical journal articles.' English for Specific Purposes 7: 181-94.
10. Fairclough, N. 1992. Discourse and Social Change. Cambridge: Polity Press.
11. Gilbert, G. 1976. 'The transformation of research findings into scientific knowledge.' Social Studies of Science 6: 281-306.
12. Gilbert, G. and M. Mulkay. 1984. Opening Pandora's Box: A Sociological Analysis of Scientific Discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
13. Gosden, H. 1993. 'Discourse functions of subject in scientific research articles.' Applied Linguistics 14: 56-75.
14. Halloran, S. 1984. 'The birth of molecular biology: An essay in the rhetorical criticism of scientific discourse.' Rhetoric Review 3: 70-83.
15. Hunston, S. 1993. 'Evaluation and ideology in scientific writing' in M. Ghadessy (ed.): Register Analysis: Theory and Practice. London: Pinter. 57-73.
16. Hyland, K. 1996a. 'Writing without conviction? Hedging in science research articles.' Applied Linguistics 17: 433-54.
17. Hyland, K. 1996b. 'Talking to the academy: Forms of hedging in science research articles.' Written Communication 13: 251-81.
18. Hyland, K. 1998a. Hedging in Scientific Research Articles. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
19. Hyland, K. 1998b. 'Persuasion and context: the pragmatics of academic metadiscourse.' Journal of Pragmatics 30: 437-55.
20. Hyland, K. 1999. 'Disciplinary discourses: writer stance in research articles' in C. Candlin and K. Hyland (eds.): Writing: Texts, Processes and Practices. London: Longman. 99-121.
21. Judson, H. 1995. The Eighth Day of Creation: The Makers of the Revolution in Biology. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books.
22. Kellenberger, E. 1989. 'Origins of molecular biology.' Plant Molecular Biology Reporter 7: 231-4.
23. Kolb, D. A. 1981. 'Learning styles and disciplinary differences' in A. Chickering (ed.): The Modern American College. San Francisco: Jossey Bass. 232-55.
24. Kuhn, T. 1970. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. 2nd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
25. Latour, B. and S. Woolgar. 1979. Laboratory Life: The Social Construction of Scientific Facts. Beverly Hills: Sage.
26. Malcolm, L. 1987. 'What rules govern tense usage in scientific articles?' English for Specific Purposes 6: 31-44.
27. Miller, C. 1984. 'Genre as social action.' Quarterly Journal of Speech 70: 157-78.
28. Myers, G. 1989. 'The pragmatics of politeness in scientific articles.' Applied Linguistics 10: 1-35.
29. Myers, G. 1990. Writing Biology: Texts in the Social Construction of Scientific Knowledge. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
30. Rorty, R. 1979. Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
31. Scollon, R. 1994. 'As a matter of fact: the changing ideology of authorship and responsibility in discourse.' World Englishes 13: 34-46.
32. Shaw, P. 1992. 'Reasons for the correlation of voice, tense and sentence function in reporting verbs.' Applied Linguistics 13: 302-19.
33. Swales, J. 1990. Genre Analysis: English in Academic and Research Settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
34. Swales, J., U. Ahmad, Y. Chang, D. Chavez, D. Dressen, and R. Seymour. 1998. 'Consider this: the role of imperatives in scholarly writing.' Applied Linguistics 19: 97-121.
35. Tadros, A. 1993. 'The pragmatics of text averral and attribution in academic texts' in M. Hoey (ed): Data, Description, Discourse. London, Harper Collins.
36. Thetela, P. 1997. 'Evaluated entities and parameters of value in academic research articles.' English for Specific Purposes 16: 101-18.
37. Thomas, S. and T. Hawes. 1994. 'Reporting verbs in medical journal articles.' English for Specific Purposes 13: 129-48.
38. Thompson, G. and Y. Ye. 1991. 'Evaluation of the reporting verbs used in academic papers.' Applied Linguistics 12: 365-82.
39. Thompson, G. 1996 'Voices in the text: discourse perspectives on language reports.' Applied Linguistics 17: 501-30.
40. Toulmin, S. 1958. The Uses of Argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
41. Watson, J. 1968. The Double Helix. Harmondsworth: Penguin.