Cited by

Cited by other publications

Bishop, Bradford H.
2014. Focusing Events and Public Opinion: Evidence from the Deepwater Horizon Disaster. Political Behavior 36:1  pp. 1 ff. Crossref logo
Ozen, Ilhan Can & Kerem Ozan Kalkan
2017. Spatial analysis of contemporary Turkish elections: a comprehensive approach. Turkish Studies 18:2  pp. 358 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 27 november 2020. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.

References

References

Audi, R.
(1998) [2003] Epistemology. A contemporary introduction to the theory of knowledge. London and New York: Routledge, 2nd ed.Google Scholar
Baker, M.
(2006) Translation and Conflict. A Narrative Account. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Calzada Pérez, M.
(ed.) (2003) A Propos of Ideology. Translation Studies on Ideology - Ideologies in Translation Studies. Manchester: St. JeromeGoogle Scholar
(2007a) Transitivity in Translating. The interdependence of texture and context. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
(2007b) “Translators and Translation Studies. Translators as Inocultators of Resistance”. The Translator 13, 2, 243–269. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, D. T.
(1974) “Evolutionary Epistemology”, in P. Schlipp (ed.), The Philosophy of Karl Popper, I, Lasalle 413-63.Google Scholar
Cheung, M. P. Y.
(2002) “Power and Ideology in Translation Research in Twentieth-Century China. An Analysis of Three Seminal Works”. In Hermans, T. (ed.), Crosscultural Transgressions. Research Models in Translation Studies II. Historical and Ideological Issues. Manchester: St Jerome, 143–164.Google Scholar
Collins, H.
(2009) “We cannot live by scepticism alone”, Nature 458, 30-1. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Culler, J.
(1992) “In Defence of Overinterpretation”, in Eco, Umberto, Interpretation and Overinterpretation. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 109–126.Google Scholar
Cunico, S. & Munday, J.
(eds.) (2007) Translation and Ideology: Encounters and Clashes. Special issue of The Translator (Volume 13/2 2007) Manchester: St Jerome.Google Scholar
Eco, U.
(1992) Interpretation and Overinterpretation. Cambridge: Cambridge UP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2001) Experiences in Translation. Toronto / Buffalo / London: University of Toronto Press. Translated by Alastair McEwen.Google Scholar
Fawcett, P.
(1998) ‘Ideology and Translation’, in Baker (ed.), Routledge Encyclopaedia of Translation Studies, first edition, 106–7.Google Scholar
Feyerabend, P.
(1987) “Ciencia: ¿grupo de presión política o instrumento de investigación?”, in Adiós a la razón. Madrid: Tecnos, 103–122.Google Scholar
Fowler, R.
(1996) ‘On Critical Linguistics’, in Caldas-Coulthard, A.R. & Coulthard, M. (eds.), Texts and Practices. Readings in critical discourse analysis. London and New York: Routledge, 2–14.Google Scholar
Gentzler, E.
(1993) Contemporary Translation Theories. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Gil Bardají, A.
(in press 2009) Traducir al-Andalus. El discurso del Otro en el arabismo español (de Conde a García Gómez). Ceredigion: The Erwin Mellon Press.Google Scholar
Goffman, E.
(1986 [1974]) Frame Analysis: An essay on the organization of experience, Boston: Northeastern University Press.Google Scholar
(1981) Forms of Talk, Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Gorlée, D. L.
(1994) Semiotics and the Problem of Translation,with Special Reference to the Semiotics of Charles S. Peirce. Amsterdam / Atlanta: Rodopi.Google Scholar
Halliday, F.
(1993) “ ‘Orientalism’ and Its Critics”, British Journal of Middle Eastern Studies 20 (2), 145–163. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Harvey, K.
(2003) ‘“Events” and “Horizons”: Reading Ideology in the “Bindings” of Translations’, in Maria Calzada Perez (ed.) Apropos of Ideology — Translation Studies on Ideology- Ideologies in Translation Studies, Manchester: St Jerome Publishing, pp. 43–69.Google Scholar
Hatim, B., & Mason, I.
(1997) The Translator as Communicator. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Irwin, R.
(1999) “Oriental discourses in Orientalism”, Middle Eastern Lectures 3, 87–110.Google Scholar
(2007) For Lust of Knowing. London: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
Jäger, S.
(2001) [2003] “Discurso y conocimiento: aspectos teóricos y metodológicos de la crítica del discurso y del análisis de dispositivos”, in Ruth Wodak & Michael Meyer (eds.), Métodos de análisis crítico del discurso. Barcelona: Gedisa. Spanish translation Tomás Fernández Aúz and Beatriz Eguíbar. (originally published as Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis, London: Sage 2001), 61–100.Google Scholar
Kovala, U.
(1996) “Translations, Paratextual Mediation, and Ideological Closure”, Target 8(1): 119–47. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kress, G.
(1996) “Representational Resources and the Production of Subjectivity. Questions for the theoretical development of Critical Discourse Analysis in a multicultural society” in Caldas-Coulthard, Carmen-Rosa; Coulthard, Malcolm (eds.). Texts and Practices. Readings in Critical Discourse Analysis. London and New York: Routledge, 15–31.Google Scholar
Lefevere, A.
(1992) Translation, Rewriting, and the Manipulation of Literary Fame, London and New York: RoutledgeGoogle Scholar
Mason, I.
(1995) “Ideology in Translation” in Robert de Beaugrande; Abdulla Shunnaq and Mohammed H. Heliel (eds.). Language, Discourse and Translation in the West and Middle East. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 23–34.Google Scholar
Meyer, S.
(2001) [2003] “Entre la teoría, el método y la política: la ubicación de los enfoques relacionados con el ACD”, in Ruth Wodak and Michael Meyer (eds.), Métodos de análisis crítico del discurso. Barcelona: Gedisa. Spanish translation Tomás Fernández Aúz and Beatriz Eguíbar. (originally published as Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis, London: Sage 2001), 35–60.Google Scholar
Munday, J.
(2007) “Translation and Ideology: A Textual Approach”, The Translator 13 (2), 195–217. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pacho, J.
Cultura como crisis. Una interpretación del falsacionismo popperiano”, in Perona, Ángeles J. (ed.) (2008) Contrastando a Popper. Madrid: Biblioteca Nueva, 151–196.Google Scholar
Popper
1972 [2001] Objective Knowledge. Oxford: The Clarendon Press. Spanish translation Carlos Solís Santos, Conocimiento objetivo: un enfoque evolucionista. Madrid: Tecnos 1974 (fourth revised edition 2001).Google Scholar
Potter, J. & Edwards, D.
(1990) “Nigel Lawson's Tent: Discourse analysis, attribution theory and the social psychology of fact”, European Journal of Social Psychology, 20, 24–40. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Potter, J.
(1996a) Representing Reality. London: Sage.Google Scholar
(1996b) “Discourse Analysis and Constructionist Approaches: Theoretical background”, in John T.E. Richardson (ed.). Handbook of qualitative research methods for psychology and the social sciences. Leicester; BPS Books.Google Scholar
Rorty, R.
(1992) “The Pragmatist’s Progress”, in Eco, U., Interpretation and Overinterpretation. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 89–108.Google Scholar
Sardar, Z.
(1999) Concepts in Social Sciences: Orientalism. Buckingham, Philadelphia: Open University Press.Google Scholar
Seguinot, C.
(1988) ‘Translating the Ideology of Science: The Example of the Work of Alfred Tomatis’, TTR: Traduction, Terminologie, Redaction 1(1): 103–12. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Seidlhofer, B.
(ed) (2003) Controversies in Applied Linguistics. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Somers, M. R. & Gibson, G. D.
(1994) ‘Reclaiming the Epistemological “Other”: Narrative and the Social Constitution of Identity’, in Craig Calhoun (ed.) Social Theory and the Politics of Identity, Oxford and Cambridge MA: Blackwell, 37–99.Google Scholar
Stubbs, M.
(1997) “Whorf’s Children: Critical Comments on Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA)”, in Ryan, A. and Wray, A. (eds.), Evolving Models of Language. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters, 100–116.Google Scholar
Tannen, D.
(ed.) (1993) Framing in Discourse, New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Truzzi, M.
(1983) [1989] “Sherlock Holmes: experto en psicología social aplicada”, in Umberto Eco and Thomas A. Sebeok, The Sign of Three. Indiana University Press; Sp. translation Esther Busquets, El signo de los tres, Barcelona: Lumen, 82–115.Google Scholar
Tymoczko, M.
(1999), “Post-colonial writing and literary translation”, in Bassnett, S.; Trivedi, H., Postcolonial Translation: Theory and Practice. London & New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
(2003) “Ideology and the Position of the Translator: In What Sense is a Translator ‘In Between’?”, in Maria Calzada Perez (ed) Apropos of Ideology: Translation Studies on Ideology - Ideologies in Translation Studies, Manchester: St. Jerome.Google Scholar
(2007), Enlarging Translation, Empowering Translators. Manchester: St Jerome.Google Scholar
van Dijk, T. A.
(1997) Discourse as Structure and Process. Sage.Google Scholar
(2003) Ideología y discurso. Barcelona: Ariel.Google Scholar
van Nieuwenhujze, C. A. O.
(1979) “Palestinian Politician-Scholar Hits Back HardBibliotheca Oricntalis, xxxvi, no. 1/2 (Januari-Maart 1979), 10–26.Google Scholar
Venuti, L.
(ed.) (1992) Rethinking Translation: Discourse, subjectivity, ideology. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Vidal Claramonte, Ma C. Á.
(2005) En los límites de la traducción. Granada: Comares.Google Scholar
Widdowson. H. G.
(2003) “Discourse Analysis: A critical view”, in Seidlhofer, Barbara, Controversies in Applied Linguistics. Oxford: OUP, 132–145.Google Scholar
Widdowson, H. G.
(2007), Discourse Analysis. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Wodak, R.
(2001) [2003] “El enfoque histórico del discurso”, in Ruth Wodak and Michael Meyer (eds.), Métodos de análisis crítico del discurso. Barcelona: Gedisa. Spanish translation Tomás Fernández Aúz and Beatriz Eguíbar. (originally published as Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis, London: Sage 2001), 101–142. CrossrefGoogle Scholar