Emphatics in academic discourse Integrating corpus and discourse tools in the study of cross-disciplinary variation

Studies in Corpus Linguistics

Volumn 31, Issue , 2008, Pages 31-55

  Bondi, Marina ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MODENA AND REGGIO EMILIA   (Italy)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85105782244     PISSN: 13880373     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1075/scl.31.04bon     Document Type: Chapter

References (32)

1. Biber, D., Conrad, S. & Cortes, V. 2004. If you look at. . .: Lexical bundles in university teaching and textbooks. Applied Linguistics 25(3): 371-405.
2. Biber, D., Conrad, S. & Reppen, R. 1998. Corpus Linguistics: Investigating language structure and use. Cambridge: CUP.
3. Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S. & Finegan, E. 1999. Longman Grammar of Spoken andWritten English. London: Pearson Education.
4. Bondi, M. 2007. Authority and expert voices in the discourse of history. In Language and discipline perspectives on academic discourse, Flottum, K. (ed.). Newcastle: Cambridge Scholar Publishing. 66-88.
5. Bondi, M. 2005. Metaargumentative expressions across genres: Representing academic discourse. In Dialogue within Discourse Communities. Metadiscursive perspectives on academic genres, J. Bamford M. Bondi (eds), 3-28. Tubingen: Niemeyer.
6. Bondi, M. 2002. Attitude and episteme in academic discourse: Adverbials of stance across genres and moves. Textus, P. Evangelisti & E. Ventola (eds), 15(2): 249-264.
7. Conrad, S. & D. Biber. 2000. Adverbial marking of stance in speech and writing. In Evaluation in Text: Authorial stance and the construction of discourse, S. Hunston & G. Thompson (eds), 1-27. Oxford: OUP
8. Hyland, K. 2001. Bringing in the reader: Addressee features in academic articles. Written Communication 18(4): 549-74.
9. Hyland, K. 2000a. Disciplinary Discourses: Social interactions in academic writing. London: Longman.
10. Hyland, K. 2000b.Hedges, boosters and lexical invisibility: Noticingmodifiers in academic texts. Language Awareness 9(4): 179-197.
11. Hyland, K. 1998a. Hedging in Scientific Research Articles. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
12. Hyland, K. 1998b. Boosting, hedging and the negotiation of academic knowledge. Text 18(3): 349-82.
13. Hyland, K. & Tse, P. 2005. Hooking the reader: A corpus study of evaluative that in abstracts. English for Specific Purposes 24(2): 123-139.
14. Lemke, J. (1998) Resources for attitudinal meaning. Evaluative orientations in text semantics, Functions of Language 5(1): 33-56.
15. Louw, B. 1993. Irony in the Text or Insincerity in the Writer?: The Diagnostic Potential of Semantic Prosodies. In Text and Technology: In honour of John Sinclair, Baker, M., Francis, G. & E. Tognini-Bonelli (eds). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 157-176.
16. Markkanen, R. & Schroder, H. (eds) 1997. Hedging and Discourse. Approaches to the analysis of a pragmatic phenomenon in academic texts. Berlin:De Gruyter.
17. Merlini Barbaresi, L. 1987. "Obviously" and "certainly": Two different functions in argumentative discourse. Folia Linguistica 21: 3-24.
18. Myers, G. 1989. The pragmatics of politeness in scientific articles. Applied Linguistics 10: 1-35.
19. Poos, D. & Simpson, R. 2002. Cross-disciplinary comparisons of hedging: Some findings from the Michigan corpus of academic spoken English. In Using Corpora to Explore Linguistic Variation, R. Reppen, S. Fitzmaurice & D. Biber (eds), 3-23. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
20. Precht, K. 2003. Great versus lovely: Stance dfferences in American and British English. In Corpus Analysis: Language structure and language use, P. Leistyna & C. F. Meyer (eds), 133-151. Amsterdam: Rodopi
21. Quirk, R., Greenbaum, R., Leech, G. & Svartvik, J. (eds) 1985. A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman.
22. Scott, M. 1998.Wordsmith Tools. Oxford:OUP.
23. Silver, M. 2003. The stance of stance: A critical look at the ways stance is expressed in academic discourse. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 2(2): 359-374.
24. Sinclair, J. 2005.What?s in a phrase. Lecture held at the University ofModena and Reggio Emilia, 15 November, 2005.
25. Sinclair, J. 2004. Trust the Text: Language, corpus and discourse. London: Routledge.
26. Sinclair, J. 1996. The search for units of meaning. Textus 9(1): 75-106.
27. Swales, J. 1990. Genre Analysis. Cambridge: CUP.
28. Swales, J. & Burke, A. 2003. "It?s really fascinating work": Differences in evaluative adjectives across academic registers. In Corpus Analysis: Language structure and language use, P. Leistyna & C. F. Meyer (eds), 1-18. Amsterdam: Rodopi.
29. Tadros, A. 1985. Prediction in Text. Birmingham: English Language Research Monographs.
30. Tognini Bonelli, E. & Del Lungo, G. (eds). 2005. Strategies in Academic Discourse. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
31. Vande Kopple,W. 1985. Some exploratory discourse on metadiscourse. College Composition and Communication 36: 82-93.
32. Wierzbicka, A. 2006. English: Meaning and culture. Oxford:OUP