A convincing argument: Corpus analysis and academic persuasion

Studies in Corpus Linguistics

Volumn 16, Issue , 2004, Pages 87-112

  Hyland, Ken ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85105450154     PISSN: 13880373     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1075/scl.16.05hyl     Document Type: Review

References (30)

1. Bakhtin, M. 1986. Speech Genres and Other Late Essays. Austin: University of Texas Press.
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/OUP.
4. Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S. and Finegan, E. 1999. Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. Harlow: Pearson.
5. Biglan, A. 1973. “The characteristics of subject matter in different scientific areas.” Journal of Applied Psychology 57 (3):204-213.
6. nd ed. Milton Keynes: OUP.
7. th ed. London: Routledge.
8. Gilbert, G. 1977. “Referencing as persuasion.” Social Studies of Science 7:113-122.
9. Hawking, S. 1993. Black Holes and Baby Universes and Other Essays. New York: Bantam.
10. Hyland, K. 1999. “Academic attribution: Citation and the construction of disciplinary knowledge.” Applied Linguistics 20 (3):341-367.
11. Hyland, K. 2000. Disciplinary Discourses: Social Interactions in Academic Writing. London: Longman.
12. Hyland, K. 2001. “Bringing in the reader: Addressee features in academic articles.” Written Communication 18 (4):549-574.
13. Hyland, K. 2002a. “Directives: Argument and engagement in academic writing.” Applied Linguistics 23 (2):215-239.
14. Hyland, K. 2002b. “What do they mean? Questions in academic writing.” Text 22 (4): 529-557.
15. Hyland, K. 2002c. “Authority and invisibility: Authorial identity in academic writing.” Journal of Pragmatics 34 (8):1091-1112.
16. Hyland, K. 2002d. “Humble servants of the discipline? Self-mention in research articles.” English for Specific Purposes 20 (3):207-226.
17. Hyland, K. 2003. “Self-citation and self-reference: Credibility and promotion in academic publication.” Journal of American Society for Information Science and Technology 54 (3):251-259.
18. Johns, A. M. 1997. Text, Role and Context: Developing Academic Literacies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
19. Kolb, D. A. 1981. “Learning styles and disciplinary differences.” In The Modern American College, A. Chickering (ed.), 232-255. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
20. nd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
21. Lemke, J. 1995. Textual Politics: Discourse and Social Dynamics. London: Taylor and Francis.
22. Milton, J. 1999. WordPilot 2000. Compulang: Hong Kong.
23. Odell, L. Goswami, D., Herrington, A. 1983. “The discourse-based interview: a procedure for exploring the tacit knowledge of writers in non-acandemic settings.” In Research on Writing: Principles and Methods, P. Mosenthal, L. Tamor and S.A. Walmsley (eds), 221-236. New York: Longman.
24. Pera, M., and Shea, W. (eds). 1991. Persuading science: The Art of Scientific Rhetoric. Canton, MA: Science History Publications.
25. Sinclair, J. 1991. Corpus Concordance and Collocation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
26. Stubbs, M. 1996. Text and Corpus Analysis. Oxford: Blackwell.
27. Swales, J. 1981. Aspects of Article Introductions (Aston ESP Research Report 1). Birmingham: University of Aston.
28. Swales, J. 1990. Genre Analysis: English in Academic and Research Settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
29. Thompson, G., and Ye, Y. 1991. “Evaluation of the reporting verbs used in academic papers.” Applied Linguistics 12:365-82.
30. WinMax Pro 1998. Text analysis software for the social sciences. Kuckartz: Berlin.