“This seems somewhat counterintuitive, though...” Negative evaluation in linguistic book reviews by male and female authors

Studies in Corpus Linguistics

Volumn 19, Issue , 2005, Pages 97-115

  Römer, Ute ^a  

^a LEIBNIZ UNIVERSITY HANNOVER   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85105490895     PISSN: 13880373     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1075/scl.19.08rom     Document Type: Review

References (41)

1. Bergvall, V. L., Bing, J. M., & Freed, A. F. (Eds.). (1996). Rethinking Language and Gender Research. Theory and Practice. London: Longman.
2. Bing, J. M. & Bergvall, V. L. (1996). The question of questions: Beyond binary thinking. In Bergvall et al. (Eds.), 1-30.
3. Bolívar, A. (2001). The negotiation of evaluation in written text. In M. Scott & G. Thompson (Eds.), Patterns of Text. In Honour of Michael Hoey (pp. 129-158). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
4. Brown, P. & Levinson, S. C. (1987). Politeness. Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
5. Bublitz, W. (1996). Semantic prosody and cohesive company: 'Somewhat predictable'. Leuvense Bijdragen (Leuven Contributions in Linguistics and Philology), 85 (1-2), 1-32.
6. Butler, J. (1999). Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity. New York: Routledge.
7. Cameron, D. (1997). Performing gender identity: Young men's talk and the construction of heterosexual masculinity. In S. Johnson & U. H. Meinhof (Eds.), Language and Masculinity (pp. 47-64). Oxford: Blackwell.
8. Channell, J. (2000). Corpus-based analysis of evaluative lexis. In Hunston & Thompson (Eds.), 38-55.
9. Coates, J. (1996). Women Talk. Oxford: Blackwell.
10. Deutschmann, M. (2003). Apologising in British English. Umeå: Umeå University Press.
11. Eckert, P. & McConnell-Ginet, S. (1992a). Communities of practice: Where language, gender and power all live. In K. Hall, M. Bucholtz, & B. Moonwomon (Eds.), Locating Power: Proceedings of the Second Berkeley Women and Language Conference (pp. 89-99). Berkeley, CA: Women and Language Group.
12. Eckert, P. & McConnell-Ginet, S. (1992b). Think practically and look locally. Language and gender as community-based practice. In C. Roman, S. Juhasz, & C. C. Miller (Eds., 1994), The Women and Language Debate. A Sourcebook (pp. 432-460). New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
13. Erwin, R. W. (1992). Reviewing books for scholarly journals. In J. M. Moxley (Ed.), Writing and Publishing for Academic Authors (pp. 111-118). Lanham, Maryland: University Press of America.
14. Freed, A. F. (1996). Language and gender research in an experimental setting. In Bergvall et al. (Eds.), 54-76.
15. Holmes, J. (1995). Women, Men and Politeness. London: Longman.
16. Hunston, S. (1993). Evaluation and ideology in scientific writing. In M. Ghadessy (Ed.), Register Analysis. Theory and Practice (pp. 57-73). London: Pinter.
17. Hunston, S. (2002). Corpora in Applied Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
18. Hunston, S. & Sinclair, J. (2000). A local grammar of evaluation. In Hunston & Thompson (Eds.), 74-101.
19. Hunston, S. & Thompson, G. (Eds.). (2000). Evaluation in Text. Authorial Stance and the Construction of Discourse. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
20. Hyland, K. (1998). Hedging in Scientific Research Articles. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
21. Hyland, K. (1999). Disciplinary discourses: Writer stance in research articles. In C. Candlin & K. Hyland (Eds.), Writing: Texts, Processes and Practices (pp. 99-121). London: Longman.
22. Hyland, K. (2000). Disciplinary Discourses. Social Interactions in Academic Writing. London: Longman.
23. Knowles, M. (1989). Some characteristics of a specific language. The language of tourism. In C. Laurén & M. Nordmann (Eds.), From Office to School. Special Language and Internationalisation (pp. 59-66). Clevedon, Philadelphia: Multilingual Matters Ltd.
24. Lakoff, G. (1972). Hedges: A study of meaning criteria and the logic of fuzzy concepts. In P. M. Peranteau, J. N. Levi, & G. C. Phares (Eds.), Papers from the Eighth Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society (pp. 183-228). Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.
25. Lakoff, R. (1975). Language and Women's Place. New York: Harper Colophon Books.
26. Linguist List (2003). Review Guidelines. Available online at: http://saussure.linguistlist.org/cfdocs/new-website/LL-WorkingDirs/pubs/reviews/guidelines.cfm (consulted: 05.05.05)
27. Litosseliti, L. & Sunderland, J. (Eds.). (2002). Gender Identity and Discourse Analysis. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
28. Markkanen, R. & Schröder, H. (Eds.). (1997). Hedging and Discourse. Approaches to the Analysis of a Pragmatic Phenomenon in Academic Texts. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
29. Markkanen, R. & Schröder, H. (1997). Hedging: A challenge for pragmatics and discourse analysis. In Markkanen & Schröder (Eds.), 3-18.
30. Mauranen, A. (1997). Hedging in language revisers' hands. In Markkanen & Schröder (Eds.), 115-133.
31. Meinhof, U. H. (1997). 'The most important event of my life!' A comparison of male and female written narratives. In S. Johnson & U. H. Meinhof (Eds.), Language and Masculinity (pp. 208-228). Oxford: Blackwell.
32. Meldrum, G. (2000). I know I have to be critical, but how? In G. M. Blue, J. Milton, & J. Saville (Eds.), Assessing English for Academic Purposes (pp. 169-187). Bern: Lang.
33. Mills, S. (2002). Rethinking Politeness, Impoliteness and Gender Identity. In Litosseliti & Sunderland (Eds.), 69-90.
34. Motta-Roth, D. (1996). Same genre, different discipline: A genre-based study of book reviews in academe. The ESPecialist, 17 (2), 99-131. Available online at: http://lael.pucsp.br/especialist/172motta-roth.ps.pdf (consulted: 05.05.05)
35. Poos, D. & Simpson, R. (2002). Cross-disciplinary comparisons of hedging. Some findings from the Michigan Corpus of Academic Spoken English. In R. Reppen, S. M. Fitzmaurice, & D. Biber (Eds.), Using Corpora to Explore Linguistic Variation (pp. 3-23). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
36. Sinclair, J. M. (1991). Corpus, Concordance, Collocation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
37. Sinclair, J. M. (Ed.). (1995). Collins COBUILD English Dictionary. London: Harper Collins.
38. Stubbs, M. (1997). Whorf's children: Critical comments on Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA). In A. Ryan & A. Wray (Eds.), Evolving Models of Language (pp. 100-116). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. Available online at: http://www.uni-trier.de/uni/fb2/anglistik/Projekte/stubbs/whorf.htm (consulted: 05.05.05)
39. Tannen, D. (1990). You Just Don't Understand. Women and Men in Conversation. London: Virago.
40. Thompson, G. & Hunston, S. (2000). Evaluation: An introduction. In Hunston & Thompson (Eds.), 1-27.
41. Tognini-Bonelli, E. (2001). Corpus Linguistics at Work. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.