Part of
Corpora, Grammar and Discourse: In honour of Susan Hunston
Edited by Nicholas Groom, Maggie Charles and Suganthi John
[Studies in Corpus Linguistics 73] 2015
► pp. 161182
Aijmer, K. & Simon-Vandenbergen, A.-M.
2006Introduction. In Pragmatic Markers in Contrast, K. Aijmer & A.-M. Simon-Vandenbergen (eds), 1-10. Oxford: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S. & Finegan, E.
1999Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. London: Pearson Education.Google Scholar
Bondi, M.
2007Authority and expert voices in the discourse of history. In Language and Discipline Perspectives on Academic Discourse, K. Fløttum (ed.), 66-88. New castle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars.Google Scholar
2008Emphatics in academic discourse: Integrating corpus and discourse tools in the study of cross-disciplinary variation. In Exploring Discourse through Corpora [Studies in Corpus Linguistics 31], A. Ädel & R. Reppen (eds), 31-55. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2009In the wake of the Terror: Phraseological tools of time setting in the narrative of history. In Academic Writing: At the Interface of Corpusand Discourse, M. Charles, D. Pecorari & S. Hunston (eds), 73-90.London: Continuum.Google Scholar
2010Metadiscursive practices in introductions: Phraseology and semantic sequences across genres. Nordic Journal of English Studies9(2): 99-123.Google Scholar
2011What is most important: marking significance in academic discourse. In Marqueurs Discursifs et Subjectivit, S. Hancil (ed.), 151-173. Rouen: Presse Universitaire de Rouen.Google Scholar
2012Authorial voice in textbooks: Between exposition and argument. In Stance and Voice in Written Academic Genres, K. Hyland & C. Sancho Guinda (eds), 101-115. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
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 4: 313-326. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2006aPhraseological patterns in reporting clauses used in citation: A corpus-based study of theses in two disciplines. English for Specific Purposes 25(3): 310-331. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2006bThe construction of stance in reporting clauses: A cross-disciplinary study of theses. Applied Linguistics 27(3): 492-518. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Coffin, C.
2006Historical Discourse. The Language of Time, Cause and Evaluation. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Conrad, S. & Biber, D.
2000Adverbial marking of stance in speech and writing.In Evaluation in Text: Authorial Stance and the Construction of Discourse, S. Hunston & G. Thompson (eds), 56-73. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Deroey, K.
2012What they highlight is: The discourse functions of basic wh-clefts in lectures. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 11(2): 112-124.Google Scholar
Deroey, K. & Taverniers, M.
2012a‘Ignore that 'cause it’s totally irrelevant’: Marking lesser relevance in lectures. Journal of Pragmatics 44(14): 2085-2099.Google Scholar
2012bJust remember this: Lexicogrammatical relevance markers in lectures. English for Specific Purposes 31(4): 221-233.Google Scholar
Fischer, K.
(ed.) 2006Approaches to Discourse Particles. Oxford: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Fraser, B.
1999What are discourse markers? Journal of Pragmatics 31: 931-952. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Giannoni, D.
2010Mapping Academic Values in the Disciplines. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Groom, N.
2005Pattern and meaning across genres and disciplines: An exploratory study. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 4(3): 257-277. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2009Phraseology and epistemology in academic book reviews: A corpus-driven analysis. In Academic Evaluation: Review Genres in University Settings, K. Hyland & G. Diani (eds), 122-139. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
2010Closed-class keywords and corpus-driven discourse analysis. In Keyness in Texts [Studies in Corpus Linguistics 41], M. Bondi & M. Scott (eds), 59-78. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hunston, S.
2008Starting with the small words: Patterns, lexis and semantic sequences. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 13(3): 271-295. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2011Corpus Approaches to Evaluation: Phraseology and Evaluative Language. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Hunston, S. & Francis, G.
1999Pattern Grammar. A Corpus-driven Approach to the Lexical Grammar of English [Studies in Corpus Linguistics 4]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hunston, S. & Sinclair, J.M.
2000A local grammar of evaluation. In Evaluation in Text. Authorial Stance and the Construction of Discourse, S. Hunston & G. Thompson (eds), 74-101. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Hyland, K.
1998Hedging in Scientific Articles [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 54]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2000Hedges, boosters and lexical invisibility: Noticing modifiers in academic texts. Language Awareness 9(4): 179-197. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2001Bringing in the reader: Addressee features in academic articles.Written Communication 17(4): 549-74. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2004Engagement and disciplinarity: The other side of evaluation. In Academic Discourse: New Insights into Evaluation, G. del Lungo Camiciotti & E. Tognini Bonelli (eds), 13-30. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
2005Stance and engagement: A model of interaction in academic discourse. Discourse Studies 7(2): 173-192. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hyland, K. & Bondi, M.
(eds) 2006Academic Discourse across Disciplines. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Knott, A., Oberlander, J., O’Donnell, M. & Mellish, C.
2001Beyond elaboration:The interaction of relations and focus in coherent text. In Text Representation: Linguistic and Psycholinguistic Aspects [Human Cognitive Processing 8], T. Sanders, J. Schilperoord & W. Spooren (eds), 181-196. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kwan, B.S.C.
2006The schematic structure of literature reviews in doctoral theses of applied linguistics. English for Specific Purposes 25: 30–55. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lemke, J.
Martin J.R. & White P.R.R.
2005The language of Evaluation. Appraisal in English. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Partington, A.
2014The marking of importance in ‘enlightentainment’ talks. In Corpus Analysis for Descriptive and Pedagogical Purposes; ESP Perspectives, M. Gotti & D. Giannoni (eds), 143-165). Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Schiffrin, D.
1987Discourse Markers. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Scott, M.
2008WordSmith Tools, Version 5. Liverpool: Lexical Analysis Software.Google Scholar
Siepmann, D.
2005Discourse Markers across Languages. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Sinclair, J.M.
1996The search for units of meaning. Textus 9(1): 75-106.Google Scholar
2004 Trust the Text : Language, Corpus and Discourse. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Sinclair, J.M. & Mauranen, A.
2006Linear Unit Grammar: Integrating Speech and Writing [Studies in Corpus Linguistics 25]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Swales, J.M.
1990Genre Analysis: English in Academic and Research Settings. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
2004Research Genres: Explorations and Applications. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Taboada, M.
2006Discourse markers as signals (or not) of rhetorical relations.Journal of Pragmatics 38: 567-592. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Thompson, G.
2001Interaction in academic writing: Learning to argue with the reader. Applied Linguistics 22(1): 58-78. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2005But me some buts: A multidimensional view of conjunction.Text 25(6): 763-791.Google Scholar
Thompson, G. & Hunston, S.
2000Evaluation: An introduction. In Evaluation in Text: Authorial Stance and the Construction of Discourse, S. Hunston &G. Thompson (eds), 1-27. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Thompson, G. & Zhou, J.
2000Evaluation and organization in text: The structuring role of evaluative disjuncts. In Evaluation in Text: Authorial Stance and the Construction of Discourse, S. Hunston & G. Thompson (eds), 121-141. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Vold, E.T.
2006Epistemic modality markers in research articles: A cross-linguistic and cross-disciplinary study. International Journal of Applied Linguistics 16(1): 61 – 87. DOI logoGoogle Scholar