Epistemic stance in the climate change debate
A comparison of proponents and sceptics on Twitter and Reddit
This study analyses epistemic stance in social media climate change discussions, contributing to our understanding
of how factuality and likelihood are evaluated in climate change discourse. Using a corpus of 1.2 million words, the paper
compares the frequencies of epistemic stance in climate change sceptic and climate change proponent discourses on two social media
platforms, Twitter and Reddit. Based on the quantitative analysis, the paper argues that both platform and climate change beliefs
influence register in terms of epistemic stance. Overall, Reddit uses more epistemic stance markers than Twitter. Sceptics use
less hedging of likelihood and more lexis evaluating the factuality and reliability of their opponents. The interpersonal
functions of epistemic stance are shown to be associated with different platform uses and affordances and with the different
goals, worldviews, and concerns of the factions. The study thus calls for further linguistic comparison of platforms and different
factions within the platforms.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Background
- 2.1Climate change discourse
- 2.2Epistemic stance and register
- 3.Materials and methods
- 3.1Data collection
- 3.2Methods
- 4.Results
- 4.1Evaluation of likelihood
- 4.2Evaluation of (non)veracity
- 4.3Pejorative evaluation of nonveracity
- 5.Discussion
- 6.Conclusion
- Notes
-
References
References (84)
References
Agius, C., Bergman Rosamond, A., & Kinnvall, C. (2020). Populism,
ontological insecurity and gendered nationalism: Masculinity, climate denial and
Covid-19. Politics, Religion and
Ideology,
21
(4), 432–450. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Alonso-Almeida, F. (2015). On
the mitigating function of modality and evidentiality. Evidence from English and Spanish medical research
papers. Intercultural
Pragmatics,
12
(1), 33–57. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Anderson, A. A., & Huntington, H. E. (2017). Social
media, science, and attack discourse: How Twitter discussions of climate change use sarcasm and
incivility. Science
Communication,
39
(5), 598–620. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Andersson, M. (2021). The
climate of climate change: Impoliteness as a hallmark of homophily in YouTube comment threads on Greta Thunberg’s
environmental activism. Journal of
Pragmatics,
178
1, 93–107. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Andi, S. (2020). How
people access news about climate change. In Newman, N., Fletcher, R., Schulz, A., Andı, S., Nielsen, R. K. (Eds.), Reuters
Institute digital news report
2020 (pp. 52–57). Oxford: Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Arlt, D., Hoppe, I., Schmitt, J. B., De Silva-Schmidt, F., & Brüggemann, M. (2018). Climate
engagement in a digital age: Exploring the drivers of participation in climate discourse online in the context of
COP21. Environmental
Communication,
12
(1), 84–98. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Baumgartner, J., Zannettou, S., Keegan, B., Squire, M., & Blackburn, J. (2020). The
Pushshift Reddit dataset. Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social
Media,
14
(1), 830–839. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Bednarek, M. (2006). Evaluation
in media discourse: analysis of a newspaper
corpus. London: Continuum.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Bednarek, M. (2008). Emotion
talk across corpora. Houndsmills: Palgrave Macmillan. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Bednarek, M., Ross, A. S., Boichak, O., Doran, Y. J., Carr, G., Altmann, E. G., & Alexander, T. J. (2022). Winning
the discursive struggle? The impact of a significant environmental crisis event on dominant climate discourses on
Twitter. Discourse, Context &
Media,
45
1, 100564. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Benjamini, Y., & Hochberg, Y. (1995). Controlling
the false discovery rate: A practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. Journal of the
Royal Statistical Society: Series B
(Methodological),
57
(1), 289–300.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Biber, D., & Conrad, S. (2019). Register,
genre, and style (2nd
ed). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Biber, D., & Egbert, J. (2018). Register
variation online. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Biber, D., & Finegan, E. (1988). Adverbial
stance types in English. Discourse
Processes,
11
(1), 1–34. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S., & Finegan, E. (1999). Longman
grammar of spoken and written
English. London: Longman.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Boye, K. (2012). Epistemic
meaning: A crosslinguistic and functional-cognitive
study. Berlin: De Gruyter. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Brüggemann, M., Elgesem, D., Bienzeisler, N., Gertz, H. D., & Walter, S. (2020). Mutual
group polarization in the blogosphere: Tracking the hoax discourse on climate
change. International Journal of
Communication,
14
1, 1025–1048.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Buckledee, S. (2018). The
language of Brexit: How Britain talked its way out of the European
Union. London: Bloomsbury Academic.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Cagle, L. E., & Herndl, C. (2019). Shades
of denialism: Discovering possibilities for a more nuanced deliberation about climate change in online discussion
forums. Communication Design
Quarterly,
7
(1), 22–39. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Charles, M. (2003). “This
mystery…”: A corpus-based study of the use of nouns to construct stance in theses from two contrasting
disciplines. Journal of English for Academic
Purposes,
2
(4), 313–326. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Chipidza, W. (2021). The
effect of toxicity on COVID-19 news network formation in political subcommunities on Reddit: An affiliation network
approach. International Journal of Information
Management,
61
1. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Clarke, I. (2022). A
multi-dimensional analysis of English tweets. Language and
Literature,
31
(2), 124–149. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Conrad, S., & Biber, D. (2000). Adverbial
marking of stance in speech and writing. In Hunston, S., Thompson, G. (Eds.), Evaluation
in text: Authorial stance and the construction of
discourse (pp. 56–73). Oxford: Oxford University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Culpeper, J. (2011). Impoliteness:
Using language to cause offence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
De Francisci Morales, G., Monti, C., & Starnini, M. (2021). No
echo in the chambers of political interactions on Reddit. Scientific
Reports,
11
(1), 2818. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Del Valle, M. E., Sijtsma, R., Stegeman, H., & Borge, R. (2020). Online
deliberation and the public sphere: Developing a coding manual to assess deliberation in Twitter political
networks. Javnost – The
Public,
27
(3), 211–229. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Du Bois, J. W. (2007). The
stance triangle. In Englebretson, R. (Ed.), Stancetaking
in
discourse (pp. 139–182). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Dunlap, R. E., & McCright, A. M. (2010). Climate
change denial: Sources, actors and strategies. In Lever-Tracy, C. (Ed.), Routledge
handbook of climate change and
society (pp. 240–259). Milton Park: Routledge.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Friginal, E., Waugh, O., & Titak, A. (2017). Linguistic
variation in Facebook and Twitter posts. In Friginal, E. (Ed.), Studies
in corpus-based
sociolinguistics (pp. 342–362). New York: Routledge. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Gablasova, D., Brezina, V., McEnery, T., & Boyd, E. (2017). Epistemic
stance in spoken L2 English: The effect of task and speaker style. Applied
Linguistics,
38
(5), 613–637. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
González, M., Roseano, P., Borràs-Comes, J., & Prieto, P. (2017). Epistemic
and evidential marking in discourse: Effects of register and
debatability. Lingua,
186–187
1, 68–87. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Gray, B., & Biber, D. (2012). Current
conceptions of stance. In Hyland, K., Guinda, C. S. (Eds.), Stance
and voice in written academic
genres (pp. 15–33). London: Palgrave Macmillan UK. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Gries, S. T. (2020). Analysing
dispersion. In Paquot, M., Gries, S. T. (Eds.), Practical
handbook of corpus
linguistics (pp. 99–118). Berlin: Springer International. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Grundmann, R., & Krishnamurthy, R. (2010). The
discourse of climate change: A corpus-based approach. Critical Approaches to Discourse Analysis
across
Disciplines,
4
(2), 113–133.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hansson, S. (2018). The
discursive micro-politics of blame avoidance: Unpacking the language of government blame
games. Policy
Sciences,
51
(4), 545–564. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hobson, K., & Niemeyer, S. (2013). “What
sceptics believe”: The effects of information and deliberation on climate change
scepticism. Public Understanding of
Science,
22
(4), 396–412. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Honnibal, M., & Johnson, M. (2015). An
improved non-monotonic transition system for dependency
parsing. In Proceedings of the 2015 Conference on Empirical Methods
in Natural Language
Processing (pp. 1373–1378). Lisbon: Association for Computational Linguistics. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hosch-Dayican, B. (2014). Online
political activities as emerging forms of political participation: How do they fit in the conceptual
map? Acta
Politica,
49
(3), 342–346.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hyland, K. (1996). Writing
without conviction? Hedging in science research articles. Applied
Linguistics,
17
(4), 433–454. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hyland, K. (1998). Boosting,
hedging and the negotiation of academic
knowledge. Text,
18
(3), 349–382.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hyland, K. (2005). Metadiscourse:
exploring interaction in
writing. London: Continuum.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Jacobs, K., & Spierings, N. (2019). A
populist paradise? Examining populists’ Twitter adoption and use. Information, Communication
&
Society,
22
(12), 1681–1696. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Jacques, P. J., & Knox, C. C. (2016). Hurricanes
and hegemony: A qualitative analysis of micro-level climate change denial
discourses. Environmental
Politics, 831–852. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Jaffe, A. (2009). Introduction. In Jaffe, A. (Ed.), Stance:
Sociolinguistic
perspectives (pp. 3–28). Oxford: Oxford University Press. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Jaidka, K., Zhou, A., & Lelkes, Y. (2019). Brevity
is the soul of Twitter: The constraint affordance and political discussion. Journal of
Communication,
69
(4), 345–372. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Jang, S. M., & Hart, P. S. (2015). Polarized
frames on “climate change” and “global warming” across countries and states: Evidence from Twitter big
data. Global Environmental
Change,
32
1, 11–17. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Jiang, F., & Hyland, K. (2015). ‘The
fact that’: Stance nouns in disciplinary writing. Discourse
Studies,
17
(5), 529–550. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Knight, G., & Greenberg, J. (2011). Talk
of the enemy: Adversarial framing and climate change discourse. Social Movement
Studies,
10
(4), 323–340. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Knoblock, N. (2020). Negotiating
dominance on Facebook : Positioning of self and others in pro- and anti-Trump comments on
immigration. Discourse &
Society,
31
(5), 520–539. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kovaka, K. (2021). Climate
change denial and beliefs about
science. Synthese,
198
(3), 2355–2374. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Leombruni, L. V. (2015). How
you talk about climate change matters: A communication network perspective on epistemic skepticism and belief
strength. Global Environmental
Change,
35
1, 148–161. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lijffijt, J., Nevalainen, T., Säily, T., Papapetrou, P., Puolamäki, K., & Mannila, H. (2016). Significance
testing of word frequencies in corpora. Digital Scholarship in the
Humanities,
31
(2), 374–397. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Massanari, A. (2017). #Gamergate
and The Fappening: How Reddit’s algorithm, governance, and culture support toxic
technocultures. New Media &
Society,
19
(3), 329–346. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Medimorec, S., & Pennycook, G. (2015). The
language of denial: text analysis reveals differences in language use between climate change proponents and
skeptics. Climatic
Change,
133
(4), 597–605. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Moore, C., & Chuang, L. (2017). Redditors
revealed: Motivational factors of the Reddit
community. In Proceedings of the 50th Hawaii International Conference
on System
Sciences (pp. 2313–2322). ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Myers, G. (1989). The
pragmatics of politeness in scientific articles. Applied
Linguistics,
10
(1), 1–35. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Myers, K. F., Doran, P. T., Cook, J., Kotcher, J. E., & Myers, T. A. (2021). Consensus
revisited: quantifying scientific agreement on climate change and climate expertise among Earth scientists 10 years
later. Environmental Research
Letters,
16
(10). ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Newman, N., Fletcher, R., Robertson, C. T., Eddy, K., & Nielsen, R. K. (2022). Reuters
Institute digital news report 2022. Oxford: Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Oz, M., Zheng, P., & Chen, G. M. (2018). Twitter
versus Facebook: Comparing incivility, impoliteness, and deliberative attributes. New Media
&
Society,
20
(9), 3400–3419. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Paradis, C. (2001). Adjectives
and boundedness. Cognitive
Linguistics,
12
(1), 47–65. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Poortinga, W., Whitmarsh, L., Steg, L., Böhm, G., & Fisher, S. (2019). Climate
change perceptions and their individual-level determinants: A cross-European analysis. Global
Environmental
Change,
55
1, 25–35. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
r/ClimateChange (n.d.). ClimateChange, Reddit, [URL]. Internet
archived version 16.10.2019. [URL]. Accessed 2.8.2022
r/ClimateSkeptics (n.d.). ClimateSkeptics, Reddit, [URL]. Internet archived version 15.10.2019. [URL] Accessed 2.8.2022
R Core Team (2019). R: A language
and environment for statistical computing [WWW Document]. [URL]
Rayson, P., Archer, D., Piao, S. L., & McEnery, T. (2004). The
UCREL semantic analysis system. In Proceedings of the Workshop on
Beyond Named Entity Recognition Semantic Labelling for NLP Tasks in Association with 4th International Conference on Language
Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2004), 25th May 2004, Lisbon,
Portugal (pp. 7–12). Lisbon, Portugal.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Robards, B. (2018). Belonging
and neo-tribalism on social media site Reddit. In Hardy, A., Bennett, A., Robards, B. (Eds.), Neo-tribes:
Consumption, leisure and
tourism (pp. 187–206). Cham: Palgrave Macmillan. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Schmid, H.-J. (2000). English
abstract nouns as conceptual shells: From corpus to
cognition. Berlin: De Gruyter. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Swales, J. M. (1990). Genre
analysis: English in academic and research
settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Titak, A., & Roberson, A. (2013). Dimensions
of web registers: an exploratory multi-dimensional
comparison. Corpora,
8
(2), 235–260. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Tranter, B., & Booth, K. (2015). Scepticism
in a changing climate: A cross-national study. Global Environmental
Change,
33
1, 154–164. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Twint project (2021). TWINT –
Twitter Intelligence Tool [Github repository], [URL]. Accessed 2.8.2022.
Vassileva, I. (2001). Commitment
and detachment in English and Bulgarian academic writing. English for Specific
Purposes,
20
(1), 83–102. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Vulpe, S. (2020). Cooling
down the future. A discourse analysis of climate change skepticism. The Social Science
Journal, 1–17. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Wiemer, B. (2018). Evidentials
and epistemic modality. In Aikhenvald, A. Y. (Ed.), The
Oxford handbook of
evidentiality (pp. 84–108). Oxford: Oxford University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Williams, H. T. P., McMurray, J. R., Kurz, T., & Lambert, F. H. (2015). Network
analysis reveals open forums and echo chambers in social media discussions of climate
change. Global Environmental
Change,
32
1, 126–138. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
World Meteorological
Organization (2022). State of the Global Climate
2021 (WMO-No.
1290). Geneva: World Meteorological Organization.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Zappavigna, M. (2014). CoffeeTweets:
bonding around the bean on Twitter. In Seargeant, P., Tagg, C. (Eds.), The
language of social
media (pp. 139–160). London: Palgrave Macmillan UK. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Zappavigna, M., & Martin, J. R. (2018). #Communing
affiliation: Social tagging as a resource for aligning around values in social
media. Discourse, Context &
Media,
22
1, 4–12. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Cited by (1)
Cited by one other publication
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 5 july 2024. 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.