Article published In:
Language, Context and Text
Vol. 2:1 (2020) ► pp.171186
Banks, David
2008The development of scientific writing: Linguistic features and historical context. London: Equinox.Google Scholar
Cohen, I. Bernard
(ed.) 1941Benjamin Franklin’s experiments: A new edition of Franklin’s experiments and observations on electricity. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Cummings, Michael
2019The language of early electrical science: Priestley and Franklin. In Miriam Pérez-Veneros & Izaskun Elorza (eds.), Systemic functional linguistics at the crossroads: Intercultural and contrastive descriptions of language, 153–159. Salamanca, Spain: University of Salamanca.Google Scholar
Eggins, Suzanne
1994An introduction to systemic functional linguistics. London: Pinter.Google Scholar
Franklin, Benjamin
1751New experiments and observations on electricity, made at Philadelphia in America. London: E. Cave. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Halliday, Michael A. K.
1988On the language of physical science. In Mohsen Ghadessy (ed.), Registers of written English: Situational factors and linguistic features, 162–178. London: Pinter. Reprinted in Michael A. K. Halliday & James R. Martin (eds.) 1993: 54–68; Michael A. K. Halliday 2004: 140–158.Google Scholar
1998Things and relations: Regrammaticizing experience as technical knowledge. In James R. Martin & Robert Veel (eds.) 1998: 185–235. Reprinted in Halliday 2004 49–101.Google Scholar
1999The grammatical construction of scientific knowledge: The framing of the English clause. In Rema R. Favretti, Giorgio Sandri & Roberto Scazzieri (eds.), Incommensurability and translation: Kuhnian perspectives on scientific communication and theory change, 85–116. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. Reprinted in Michael A. K. Halliday 2004: 102–134.Google Scholar
2004The language of science, volume 5 in the collected works of M.A.K. Halliday. Edited by Jonathan J. Webster. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Halliday, Michael A. K. & James R. Martin
1993Writing science: Literacy and discursive power. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.Google Scholar
Halliday, Michael A. K. & Christian M. I. M. Matthiessen
2014Halliday’s introduction to functional grammar (4th edition). New York: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heilbron, John L.
1979Electricity in the 17th and 18th centuries: A study of early modern physics. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Martin, James R.
1992English text: System and structure. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1997Analyzing genre: Functional parameters. In Frances Christie & James R. Martin (eds.), Genre and institutions: Social processes in the workplace and school, 3–39. London: Cassell.Google Scholar
Martin, James R. & David Rose
2003Working with discourse: Meaning beyond the clause. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
2008Genre relations: Mapping culture. London: Equinox.Google Scholar
Martin, James R. & Robert Veel
(eds.) 1998Reading science: Critical and functional perspectives on discourses of science. London & New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Miles, Henry
1746–1747Extracts of two letters from the Rev. Henry Miles, D.D. and F.R.S. to Mr. Henry Baker, F.R.S. concerning the effects of a cane of black sealing-wax and a cane of brimstone, in electrical experiments. Philosophical Transactions 441. 27–32. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Priestley, Joseph
1767The history and present state of electricity, with original experiments. London: Dodsley, Johnson, Davenport & Cadell.Google Scholar
1769The history and present state of electricity, with original experiments. 2nd edition. London: Dodsley, Johnson, Davenport & Cadell.Google Scholar
Rose, David
1997Science, technology and technical literacies. In Frances Christie & James R. Martin (eds.), Genre and institutions: Social processes in the workplace and school, 40–72. London: Cassell.Google Scholar
Watson, William
1748A collection of the electrical experiments communicated to the Royal Society by Wm. Watson, F.R.S. read at several meetings between October 29, 1747 and January 21 following. Philosophical Transactions 451. 49–120. DOI logoGoogle Scholar