Cover not available
Article published In:
On mood and speech function and the ‘why’ of text analysis: In honour of Margaret Berry
Edited by Lise Fontaine, Miriam Taverniers and Kristin Davidse
[Functions of Language 26:1] 2019
► pp. 49–55

Do we need more of the same?

Some reflections on text analytical research

| Ghent University
Article outline
  • What functions should text analysis serve?
  • What are the pitfalls text analysis must avoid?
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References


This article is currently available as a sample article.

Published online: 27 May 2019
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/fol.00016.sim
References
Bavelas, Janet Beavin, Alex Black, Nicole Chovil & Jennifer Mullett
1990 Equivocal Communication. Newbury Park: Sage.Google Scholar
Berry, Margaret
2014 Changes in Systemic Functional Linguistics: Past developments, ongoing developments (and future developments?). Paper presented at the 25th European Systemic Functional Congress, Paris, 9–12 July 2014.
Berry, Margaret, Geoff Thompson & Hilary Hillier
2014 Theme and variations. In María de los Ángeles Gómez González, Francisco José Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez & Francisco Gonzálvez García (eds.), Theory and practice in functional-cognitive space (Studies in Functional and Structural Linguistics 68), 107–126. Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar
Biber, Doug
1988 Variation across Speech and Writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Biber, Doug, Stig Johansson, Geoffrey Leech, Susan Conrad & Edward Finegan
1999 The Longman grammar of spoken and written English. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Bull, Peter & Anne-Marie Simon-Vandenbergen
2014 Equivocation and doublespeak in far right-wing discourse: An analysis of Nick Griffin’s performance on BBC’s Question Time . Text & Talk 34(1). 1–22. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
in press. Conflict in political discourse. In Lesley Jeffreys & Jim O’Driscoll eds. The Routledge handbook of language and conflict Oxford Routledge DOI logo
Butler, Christopher S.
2004a Multi-word sequences and their relevance for recent models of Functional Grammar. Functions of Language 10(2). 179–208. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2004b Corpus studies and functional linguistic theories. Functions of Language 11(2). 147–186. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K.
1971 Linguistic function and literary style: An inquiry into the language of William Golding’s The Inheritors . In Seymour Chatman (ed.), Literary style: A symposium. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. & J. R. Martin
1993 Writing science: Literacy and discursive power. London: Falmer Press.Google Scholar
Labov, William
1981 What can be learned about change in progress from synchronic description? In David Sankoff & Henrietta Cedergren (eds.), Variation Omnibus. Edmonton: Linguistic Research Inc.Google Scholar
Martin, J. R. & Robert Veel
(eds.) 1998 Reading science: Critical and functional perspectives on discourses of science. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Simon-Vandenbergen, Anne-Marie
2008 “Those are only slogans”: A linguistic analysis of argumentation in debates with extremist political speakers. Journal of Language and Social Psychology 27(4). 345–358. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sinclair, John McH
1992 Trust the text: The implications are daunting. In Martin Davies & Louise Ravelli (eds.), Advances in Systemic Linguistics: Recent theory and practice, 5–19. London: Pinter.Google Scholar
Stubbs, Michael
1995 Collocations and semantic profiles: On the cause of the trouble with quantitative studies. Functions of Language 2(1). 23–55. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Thompson, Geoff
2003 The elided participant: Presenting an uncommonsense view of the researcher’s role. In Anne-Marie Simon-Vandenbergen, Miriam Taverniers & Louise Ravelli (eds.), Grammatical metaphor: Views from Systemic Functional Linguistics, 257–278. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Webster, Jonathan J.
(ed.) 2002 Linguistic Studies of Text and Discourse. Volume 21 in the Collected Works of M. A. K. Halliday. London: Continuum.Google Scholar