The power of words: Unveiling the speaker and writer's hidden craft

The Power of Words: Unveiling the Speaker and Writer's Hidden Craft

Volumn , Issue , 2003, Pages 1-246

  Kaufer, David ^a   Ishizaki, Suguru ^a   Butler, Brian ^a   Collins, Jeff ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84909336999     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4324/9781410609748     Document Type: Book

References (144)

1. Austin, J. L. (1997). How to do things with words. Oxford: Oxford University Press. New York, NY: Norton.
2. Altenberg, B. (1990). Speech as linear composition. In G. Caie, K. Haastrup, A. L. Jakobsen, A. L. Nielsen, J. Sevaldsen, H. Specht, & A. Zettersten (Eds.), Proceedings from the Fourth Nordic Conference for English Studies, Vol 1. (pp. 133-143). Copenhagen: University of Copenhagen.
3. Bainton, G. (1890). (Ed.), The art of authorship: Literary reminiscences, methods of work, and advice to young beginners, personally contributed by leading authors of the day. New York: D. Appleton and Company, 1890.
4. Bazerman., C., & Russell, D.R. (Eds.) (2002). Writing selves/Writing societies: Research from activity perspectives. Perspectives on writing. Fort Collins, CO: The WAC clearinghouse and Mind, Culture, and Activity. Retrieved August 1, 2003, from http://wac.colostate.edu/books/selves_societies/
5. Bazerman, C. (1994). Systems of genres and the enactment of social intentions. In A. Freedman & P. Medway (Eds.), Genre and the New Rhetoric (pp. 79-101). London, UK: Taylor & Francis.
6. Becker, A.L. (1991). A Short essay on languaging. In F. Steier (Ed.), Research and Reflexivity (pp. 226-234). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
7. Bell, M. S. (1997). Narrative design: A writer's guide to structure. New York, NY: Norton.
8. Berelson, B. (1952). Content analysis in communication research. New York, NY: Free Press.
9. Berkenkotter, C., & Huckin, T. (1995). Genre knowledge in disciplinary communication: cognition/culture/power. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum & Associates.
10. Berthoff, A. (Ed.). (1991). I. A. Richards on rhetoric: Selected essays, 1929-1974. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
11. Biber, D. (1988). Variation across speech and writing. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
12. Biber, D., Conrad, S., & Reppen, R. (1998). Corpus linguistics: Investigating language structure and use. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
13. Bleich, D. (1998). Know and tell: A writing pedagogy of disclosure, genre, and membership. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann-Boynton/Cook.
14. Booth, W. (1969). The rhetoric of fiction. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
15. Buranen, L., & Roy, A. M. (Eds.). (1999). Perspectives on plagiarism and intellectual property in a postmodern world. Albany, NY: State University of New York Albany Press.
16. Burke, K. (1969). Rhetoric of motives. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
17. Burton, G. (1996) Silvae Rhetoricae. http: //humanities.byu.edu /rhetoric/silva.htm
18. Chafe, W. (1994). Discourse, consciousness, and time: The flow and displacement of conscious experience in speaking and writing. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
19. The Chicago Manual of Style (14th ed.) (1993). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
20. Channell J. (2000). Corpus-based analysis of evaluative lexis. In Hunston & Thompson (Eds.), Evaluation in text: Authorial stance and the construction of discourse (pp. 38- 55). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
21. Chomsky, N. (1957). Aspects of the theory of syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
22. Clark, H. (1996). Using language. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
23. Collins, J. (2002, March). Tuning the ear for words: Capturing reading experience through visualization technology. Paper presented at the Conference on College Composition and Communication, Chicago.
24. Collins, J. (2003). Variations in Written English: Characterizing the Authors' Rhetorical Language Choices Across Corpora of Published Texts. PhD thesis, Carnegie Mellon University.
25. Collins, J., Kaufer D., Neuwirth, C. M., Hajduk, T. J., & Palmquist, M. (2002). Representational differences in the writings of experts and novices. Unpublished manuscript, Pittsburgh, PA.
26. Coulson, S. (2001). Semantic leaps: Frame shifting and conceptual blending in meaning construction. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
27. Coulson, R., & Oakley, A. (2000). Blending basics. Cognitive Linguistics, 11, 175-196.
28. Croft, W. & Cruse, D.A.. (In press). Cognitive Linguistics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
29. Crismore, A. (1989). Talking with readers: Metadiscourse as rhetorical act. New York, NY: Peter Lang Publishing.
30. Day, R. (2001). The modern invention of information: Discourse, history, and power. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois Press.
31. Didion, J. (1979). The white album. New York, NY: Farrar, Straus & Giroux
32. Ede L., & Lunsford, A. (1990). Singular texts/plural authors: Perspectives on collaborative writing. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.
33. Elbow, P. (1991). Some thoughts on expressive discourse: A review essay. Journal of Advanced Composition, 11, 83-93.
34. Fauconnier, G. (1994). Mental Spaces: Aspects of Meaning Construction in Natural Language. NewYork, NY: Cambridge University Press.
35. Fauconnier, G. (1997). Mappings in Thought and Language. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
36. Fauconnier, G. & Turner, M. (1998). Conceptual Integration Networks. Cognitive Science 22, 133-187.
37. Fauconnier, G., & Turner., M. (2002). The way we think: Conceptual blending and the mind's hidden complexities. New York, NY: Basic Books.
38. Faust, M. (2000). Reconstructing familiar metaphors: John Dewey and Louise Rosenblatt on literary art as experience. Research in the Teaching of English, 35(1), 35-65.
39. Faigley, L., & Witte S. (1986). Analyzing revision. College Composition and Communication, 32, 400-414.
40. Fairclough, N. (1989). Language and power. London, UK: Longman.
41. Fillmore, C., Kay, P., Michaelis, L., & Sag, I. (In press). Construction Grammar. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.
42. Firbas J. (1992). Functional sentence perspective in written and spoken communication. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
43. Fish, S. (1980). Is there a text in this class? The authority of interpretative communities. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
44. Fitzmaurice, S. (2002). Intersubjectivity and the linguistic construction of addressee/interlocutor/reader stance. Paper presented at the Modern Language Association Conference, New York, December 28.
45. Fletcher, R. (1992). What a writer needs. Portsmouth, NH: Heineman.
46. Flower, L., Hayes, J. R., Carey, L., Schriver, K. & Stratman J. (1986). Detection, diagnosis, and the strategies of revision. College Composition and Communication, 37, 16-55.
47. Foley, M. (1997). Anthropological linguistics: An introduction. Oxford, UK: Basil Blackwell.
48. Foucault, M. (1977). What is an author? In D. F. Bouchard (Ed.). Language, countermemory, practice (pp. 124-127). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
49. Francis, W. N., & Kucera, H. (1979). Brown corpus manual. Available online at http://www.hit.uib.no/icame/brown/bcm.html .
50. Freedman, A., & Medway, P. (1994). Locating genre studies: Antecedents and prospects. In A. Freedman & P. Medway (Eds.), Genre and the new rhetoric (pp. 1-22). London, UK: Taylor & Francis.
51. Galbraith, D., & Torrance, M. (1999). Conceptual processes in writing: From problem solving to text production. In M. Torrance & D. Galbraith (Eds.), Knowing what to write: Conceptual processes in text production (pp. 1-12). Amsterdam, Netherlands: Amsterdam University Press.
52. Geisler, C. (1994). Academic literacy and the nature of expertise. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
53. Gere, A. (2001). Revealing silence: Rethinking personal writing. College Composition and Communication, 53, 203-223.
54. Goldberg, A. (1995). Constructions: A construction grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
55. Gurak, C. (2001). Cyberliteracy: Navigating the Internet with awareness. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
56. Hale, C. (1999). Sin and syntax: How to craft wickedly effective prose: New York, NY: Broadway Books.
57. Halliday, M.A.K. (1994). An Introduction to functional grammar. (2nd Ed.). London, UK: Edward Arnold.
58. Halliday, M.A.K., & Matthieson, C. (1999). Construing experience through meaning. New York, NY: Cassell.
59. Halliday, M.A.K., & Hasan, R. (1976). Cohesion in English. London, UK: Longman.
60. Hart, R. (2000). Campaign talk: Why elections are good for us. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
61. Harvard, U. (2001). Close reading guidelines, [URL]. Harvard University Writing Center. Available online at http: //www.fas.harvard.edu /~wricntr/.
62. hooks, B. (2000). Rhapsody remembered: Dancing with words. Journal of Advanced Composition, 20 (1), 1-8.
63. Hopper, P. (1999a). A short course in grammar. New York, NY: Norton.
64. Hopper, P. (1999b). Was Bakhtin a proto-integrationalist? Paper presented at MLA Conference. Washington , D.C.
65. Hopper, P. & Thompson S. (1980) Transitivity in grammar and discourse. Language 56 (2): 251-299.
66. Hopper, P., & Traugott E. (1993) Grammaticalization (Cambridge Textbooks in Linguistics). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
67. Hopper, P. (2002). Hendiadys and auxiliation in English. In J. Bybee & M. Noonan (Eds.), Complex sentences in grammar and discourse: Essays in honor of Sandra A. Thompson (pp. 145-174). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
68. Howard, R. (1999). Standing in the shadow of giants: Plagiarists, authors, collaborators. Stamford, CT: Ablex.
69. Hunston, S., & Thompson, (Eds.). (2000). Evaluation in text: Authorial stance and the construction of discourse. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
70. Hundt, M., Sand, A., & Siemud, R. (1998). Manual of information to accompany the Freiburg-LOB corpus of British English. Available online at http://www.hit.uib.no/icame/cd.
71. Hyland, K. (2000). Disciplinary discourses: Social interactions in academic writing. New York, NY: Longman.
72. Hyland, K. (2001). Bringing in the reader: Addressee features in academic article. Written Communication, 18, 549-574.
73. Hylton, J. (2000). Complete works of William Shakespeare. Available online at http://the-tech.mit.edu/Shakespeare/works.html.
74. Iser, W. (1978). The act of reading: A theory of aesthetic response. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
75. Jackendoff, R. (1999). The representational structures of the language faculty and their interactions. In C. M. Brown & P. Hagoort (Eds.), The neurocognition of language (pp. 37-71). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
76. Jackendoff, R., & Landau, B. (1995). Spatial Language and Spatial Cognition. In R. Jackendoff (Ed.), Languages of the mind: Essays on mental representation (pp. 99-124). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
77. Johnson, T.R. (2003). A rhetoric of pleasure: Prose style and today's composition classroom. Portsmouth, NH: Boynton Cook.
78. Johnstone, B. (1996). The linguistic individual: Self-expression in language and linguistics: Oxford: Oxford University Press.
79. Johnstone, B. (2002). Discourse analysis. London, UK: Blackwell.
80. Kachigan, S. K. (1991). Multivariate statistical analysis (2nd ed.). FDR Station, NY: Radius Press.
81. Kaufer, D. (2000).White Paper on Flaming: Research behind the MoodWatch flame detection program. Available from the author.
82. Kaufer, D. (forthcoming). The public and the private in the New York Times writers and writing series. In T. Kent & B. Couture (Eds.), The private, the public, and the published: Reconciling private lives and public. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.
83. Kaufer, D., & Butler, B. (1996). Rhetoric and the arts of design. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum & Associates.
84. Kaufer, D., & Butler, B. (2000). Designing interactive worlds with words: Principles of writing as representational composition. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum & Associates .
85. Kaufer, D., & Carley, K. (1993). Communication at a distance: The influence of print on sociocultural change. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum & Associates.
86. Kaufer, D., & Geisler, C. (1989). Novelty in academic writing. Written Communication, 6, 286-311.
87. Kaufer, D., Hayes, J.R., & Flower, L. (1986). Composing written sentences. Research in the Teaching of English, 20, 121-140.
88. Kaufer, D., Ishizaki, S., Ishizaki, K., Butler, B., Collins, J., Vlachos, P. K., & Ritivoi, M. (2002). Docuscope. Available online at http://betterwriting.net/docuscope.
89. Kibler, J., & van Leeuwen, S. H. (2002). Inaugural addresses of the presidents of the United States. Available online at http://www.bartleby.com/124/index.html.
90. Kolln, M. (1999). Rhetorical grammar: Grammatical choices, rhetorical effects (3rd ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
91. Kucera, H., & Francis W. (1967). Computational analysis of present-day American English. Providence, RI: Brown University Press.
92. Lakoff, G. (1987). Woman, fire, and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
93. Lakoff, G., & Johnson M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago.
94. Langacker. R. (1987). Foundations of Cognitive Grammar, Volume 1: Theoretical Prerequisites. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
95. Langacker, R. (1990). Concept, Image, and Symbol. Berlin, Germany: Mouton de Gruyter.
96. Lanham, R. (1999). Revising prose (4th Ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
97. Lautamatti, L. (1987). Observations on the development of the topic in simplified discourse. In U. Connor & R. B. Kaplan (Eds.), Writing across languages: Analysis of L2 texts (pp. 87-113). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley (Originally published 1978).
98. Lippman, W. (1927). The phantom public. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Press.
99. Locker, K. (1999). Factors in reader responses to negative letters: Experimental evidence for changing what we teach. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 13, 5-48.
100. Lynch, J. (2001). On-line style guide: Rutgers University. Retrieved Sept 1, 2002, from http://newark.rutgers.edu/~jlynch/Writing/
101. Manning C. D., & Schutze, H. (2001). Foundations of statistical natural language processing. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
102. Manovich, L. (2001). The language of the new media. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
103. McGann, J. (2001). Reading fiction, teaching fiction. Pedagogy, 1, 143-165.
104. Melville H. (1856). Benito Cereno. Available online at http: // books.mirror.org/melville/benitocereno/s006.html, accessed July 3, 2003.
105. Miller, C. (1984). Genre as social action. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 70, 151-167.
106. Myers, B. R. (2001, July/August). A reader's manifesto: An attack on the growing pretentiousness of American literary prose. The Atlantic Monthly, 104-122.
107. Nunberg, G. (1990). The linguistics of punctuation. Palo Alto, CA: Center for the Study of Language and Information.
108. Olson, D. (1994). The world on paper. New York: Cambridge University Press.
109. Ong, W. (1975). The writer's audience is always a fiction. PMLA, 90, 9-21.
110. Ong, W. (1982). Orality and literacy: The technologizing of the word. New York, NY: Routledge.
111. Parsons, T. (1990). Events in the semantics of English: A study in subatomic semantics. Cambridge MA: MIT Press.
112. Perelman, C., & Olbrechts-Tyteca, L. (1969). The new rhetoric: A treatise on argumentation (J. Wilkinson & P. Weaver, Trans.). South Bend, IN: University of Notre Dame Press.
113. Quinn, A. (1993). Figures of speech: 60 ways to turn a phrase. Davis, CA: Hermagoras Press.
114. Reddy, R. (1979).The conduit metaphor -A case of frame conflict in our language about language. In A. Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and thought (pp. 284-324). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
115. Richards, I. A. (1950). Practical criticism. New York, NY: Harcourt Brace (originally published 1929).
116. Richards, I. A. (1974). Meanings as instruments in A. Berthoff (Ed.), Richards on rhetoric. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
117. Roberts, C. (1997). A theoretical map for selecting among text analysis methods. In C. Roberts (Ed.), Text Analysis for the social sciences (pp. 275-283). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
118. Rosenblatt, L. A. (1978). The reader, the text, the poem: The transactional theory of the literary work. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.
119. Schneider, B. (2002). Nonstandard quotes: Superimpositions and cultural. College Composition and Communication, 54, 188-207.
120. Schryer, C. (2000). Walking a fine line: Writing negative letters in an insurance company. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 14, 445-497.
121. Schwanenflugel, P. J., & White, C. R. (1991). The influence of paragraph information on the processing of upcoming words. Reading Research Quarterly, 26, 160-177.
122. Scott, M. (1998) The WordSmith Program. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
123. Sinclair, J. M. (Ed.). (1995). Collins COBUILD English dictionary. London, UK: HarperCollins.
124. Sinclair, J. M. (1991). Corpus, concordance, collocation. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
125. Smagorinsky, P., & Smith. M. W. (2000). Special Issue on "Is there a text in this study?" Research in the Teaching of English, 35, 1-20.
126. Spears, R.A. (2000). NTC's American idioms dictionary (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
127. Swales, J. (1990). Genre analysis. Analysing academic and research texts. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
128. Turner, M. (1996). The literary mind. New York, NY: Oxford.
129. Turner, M. (2001). Cognitive Foundations of Social Science. New York; Oxford University Press.
130. Vongvipanond, P. (1994). Linguistic perspectives of Thai Culture. Paper presented to a workshop of teachers of social science organized by the University of New Orleans. Retrieved March 1, 2003, from http://www.thaiarc.tu.ac.th/host/thaiarc/thai/peansiri.htm
131. Warner, M. (2002). Publics and counterpublics, Public Culture, 14, 49-90.
132. Webster's New International Dictionary of the English Language Unabridged (1948). 2nd edition. Springfield, MA: G. & C. Merriam.
133. Wierzbicka, A. (1992). Semantics, culture, and cognition. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
134. Witmore, M. (2001). Culture of accidents: Unexpected knowledges in early modern England. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.
135. Williams, J. (2000). Style: Ten lessons in clarity and grace (6th ed.). New York: Longman.
136. Williams, J. (1981a). The phenomenology of error. College Composition and Communication, 32, 152-168.
137. Williams, J. (1981b). Literary style: The personal voice. In T. Shapen & J.M. Williams (Eds.), Style and variables in English (pp. 116-126). Cambridge, MA: Winthrop.
138. Winsor, D. (1999). Genre and activity systems. Written Communication, 16, 200-224.
139. Wolf, G. (1999). An introduction to essays on integrational linguistics in the context of 20th-Century theories of language. Language & Communication, 19, 1-8.
140. Wooden, J. A., DeVore, J., Graef, C., & Westman, L. (1998). Truth in advertising: Vintage cigarette and tobacco ads. Retrieved August 1, 2003, from http://www.chickenhead.com/truth/index.html .
141. Woodmansee, M. (1996). The author, art, and the market. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.
142. Woodmansee, M., & Jaszi, P. (Eds.). (1994). The construction of authorship: Textual appropriation in law and literature. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
143. Wray, A., & Perkins, M. (2000). The functions of formulaic language: An integrated model. Language & Communication, 20, 1-28.
144. Yovel, J. (2002). Rights and Rites: Initiation, Language and Performance in Law and Legal Education Stanford Agora 2 (formerly the Stanford Journal of Legal Studies). Retrieved July 5, 2003, from http://agora.stanford.edu/agora/volume2/yovel/shtml.