Article published In:
Spanish in Context
Vol. 19:3 (2022) ► pp.537562
References (53)
Referencias
Albalat-Mascarell, Ana, y María Luisa Carrió-Pastor. 2019. “Self-representation in Political Campaign Talk: A Functional Metadiscourse Approach to Self-mentions in Televised Presidential Debates.” Journal of Pragmatics 1471: 86–99. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Albalat-Mascarell, Ana. 2018. “Worst Trade Deal Maybe Ever Signed? A Contrastive Analysis of Hedges in Campaign Debates.” En Languages at the Crossroads: Training, Accreditation and Context of Use, ed. por Francisco Javier Díaz Pérez y María Águeda Moreno Moreno, 165–174. Jaén: Publicaciones de la Universidad de Jaén.Google Scholar
Blanco Valdés, Roberto L. 2017. “El año que vivimos peligrosamente: del bipartidismo imperfecto a la perfecta ingobernabilidad.” Revista Española de Derecho Constitucional 1091: 63–96. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Blas Arroyo, José Luis. 2010. “La función de las preguntas en un discurso agonal: el debate electoral cara a cara.” Discurso & Sociedad 4 (4): 674–705.Google Scholar
Carrió-Pastor, María Luisa. 2019a. “Different ways to express personal attitudes in Spanish and English engineering papers: An analysis of metadiscourse devices, affective evaluation and sentiment analysis.” Lodz Papers in Pragmatics 15 (1): 45–67. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2019b. “Do writers express the same attitude in historical genres?” En Writing history in Late Modern English. Explorations of the Coruña Corpus, ed. por Isabel Moskowich et al., 237–259. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2019c. “Authorial Engagement in Business Emails.” En Engagement in Professional Genres, ed. por Carmen Sancho-Guinda, 47–66. Ámsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Castromil, Antón, y Raquel Rodríguez. 2019. “Del “cara a cara” a los debates “a cuatro” en España”. En Debates electorales televisados: del antes al después, ed. por E. Conde-Vázquez et al., 27–47. La Laguna: Latina.Google Scholar
Charandeau, Patrick. 2009. “Reflexiones para el análisis del discurso populista [Reflections for the analysis of populist discourse].” Discurso & Sociedad 3 (2): 253–279.Google Scholar
Crismore, Avon, y Rodney Farnsworth. 1989. “Mr. Darwin and his Readers: Exploring Interpersonal Metadiscourse as a Dimension of Ethos.” Rhetoric Review 8 (1): 91–112. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dader, José Luis. 2017. “Campañas políticas “online”: La realidad española frente al horizonte internacional del “tecnocabildeo”.” En La búsqueda digital del voto: cibercampañas electorales en España 2015–2016, ed. por José Luis Dader y Eva Campos, 11–73. Valencia: Tirant Lo Blanch.Google Scholar
De Fina, Anna. 1995. “Pronominal Choice, Identity, and Solidarity in Political Discourse.” Text-Interdisciplinary Journal for the Study of Discourse 15 (3): 379–410. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ekström, Mats. 2001. “Politicians Interviewed on Television News.” Discourse & Society 12 (5): 563–584. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fairclough, Norman. 1992. Discourse and Social Change. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Fenton-Smith, Ben. 2008. “Discourse Structure and Political Performance in Adversarial Parliamentary Questioning.” Journal of Language and Politics 7 (1): 97–118. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fu, Xiaoli, y Ken Hyland. 2014. “Interaction in Two Journalistic Genres: a Study of Interactional Metadiscourse.” English Text Construction 7 (1): 122–144. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fuertes-Olivera, Pedro A., Marisol Velasco-Sacristán, Ascensión Arribas-Baño, y Eva Samariego-Fernández. 2001. “Persuasion and Advertising English: Metadiscourse in Slogans and Headlines.” Journal of Pragmatics 33 (8): 1291–1307. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gallardo Paúls, Beatriz. 2018. Tiempos de hipérbole. Inestabilidad e interferencias en el discurso político. Valencia: Tirant Lo Blanch.Google Scholar
He, Mengyu, y Hajar Abdul Rahim. 2019. “Comparing Engagement Markers in Economics Research Articles and Opinion Pieces: A Corpus-based Study.” GEMA Online® Journal of Language Studies 19 (2): 1–14. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hyland, Ken, y Feng K. Jiang. 2016. ““We must conclude that…”: A diachronic study of academic engagement.” Journal of English for Academic Purposes 241: 29–42. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hyland, Ken, y Polly Tse. 2004. “Metadiscourse in Academic Writing: A Reappraisal.” Applied Linguistics 25 (2): 156–177. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hyland, Ken. 2001. “Bringing in the Reader: Addressee Features in Academic Articles.” Written Communication 18 (4): 549–574. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2002a. “Directives: Argument and Engagement in Academic Writing.” Applied Linguistics 23 (2): 215–219. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2002b. “Academic Argument: Induction or Interaction.” Revista Canaria de Estudios Ingleses 44 (1): 29–45.Google Scholar
. 2005. Metadiscourse: Exploring Interaction in Writing. Londres: Continuum.Google Scholar
. 2010. “Metadiscourse: Mapping Interactions in Academic Writing.” Nordic Journal of English Studies 9 (2): 125–143. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ilie, Cornelia. 2000. “Cliché-based Metadiscursive Argumentation in the Houses of Parliament.” International Journal of Applied Linguistics 10(1): 65–84. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2003. “Discourse and Metadiscourse in Parliamentary Debates.” Journal of Language and Politics 2 (1): 71–92. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ivanova, Anna. 2016. “Deixis and its role in defining rhetorical space.” Revista Signos 49 (92): 329–349. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ivorra-Pérez, Francisco Miguel, y Rosa Giménez Moreno. 2018. “The Level of Context Dependence of Engagement Markers in Peninsular Spanish and US Business Websites.” LFE: Revista de lenguas para fines específicos 24 (2): 38–53. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kuhi, Davud, Mahya Esmailzad, y Shirin Rezaei. 2020. “An Investigation of the Online Farsi Translation of Metadiscourse Markers in American Presidential Debates.” The Journal of Applied Linguistics and Applied Literature: Dynamics and Advances 8 (1): 51–64.Google Scholar
Laclau, Ernesto. 2005. La razón populista. Buenos Aires: Fondo de Cultura Económica de Argentina.Google Scholar
Lafuente-Millán, Enrique. 2014. “Reader Engagement across Cultures, Languages and Contexts of Publication in Business Research Articles.” International Journal of Applied Linguistics 24 (2): 201–223. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lee, Joseph J., y Nicholas C. Subtirelu. 2015. “Metadiscourse in the Classroom: A Comparative Analysis of EAP Lessons and University Lectures.” English for Specific Purposes 371: 52–62. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Llisterri, Joaquim. 2020. “La representación ortográfica de corpus orales.” En [URL] [Acceso 06/12/2020].
Longás, Heber. 2016. “Ideología de los votantes, por partidos.” En [URL] [Acceso 15/12/2020].
Mai, Hongyu. 2016. “An Intercultural Analysis of Metadiscourse Markers as Persuasive Power in Chinese and American Political Speeches”. International Journal of Language and Linguistics 4 (6): 207–219. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Moya Muñoz, Patricio, y María Luisa Carrió-Pastor. 2018. “Análisis comparativo de los marcadores de implicación en los comentarios sobre noticias digitales en España y Chile.” Onomázein: Revista de lingüística, filología y traducción de la Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile 41: 26–48. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mur-Dueñas, Pilar. 2008. “Analysing Engagement Markers Cross-Culturally: the Case of English and Spanish Business Management Research Articles.” En English as an Additional Language in Research Publication and Communication, ed. por Sally Burgess y Pedro Martín Martín, 197–214. Berna: Peterlang.Google Scholar
. 2011. “An Intercultural Analysis of Metadiscourse Features in Research Articles Written in English and in Spanish.” Journal of Pragmatics 43 (12): 3068–3079. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pavlidou, Theodossia-Soula (ed.). 2014. Constructing Collectivity: ‘We’ across Languages and Contexts. Ámsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Proctor, Katarzyna, y Lily I.-Wen Su. 2011. “The 1st Person Plural in Political Discourse – American Politicians in Interviews and in a Debate.” Journal of Pragmatics 43 (13): 3251–3266. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Reyes, Antonio. 2015. “Building intimacy through linguistic choices, text structure and voices in political discourse.” Language & Communication 431: 58–71. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rúas-Araújo, José, Francisco Campos-Freire, y Paulo López-López. 2020. “Historia, evolución, audiencia y agenda temática de los debates electorales televisados en España dentro del contexto europeo.” Estudios sobre el Mensaje Periodístico 26 (2): 787–806. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Simone, Raffaele. 2016. El hada democrática. Por qué la democracia fracasa en su búsqueda de ideales. Madrid: Taurus.Google Scholar
Suau-Jiménez, Francisca, y Rosana Dolón Herrero. 2008. “El metadiscurso en la traducción de textos performativos.” Congreso Internacional de AESLA celebrado en abril de 2008, Almería.Google Scholar
Suau-Jiménez, Francisca. 2012. “El turista 2.0 como receptor de la promoción turística: estrategias lingüísticas e importancia de su estudio.” PASOS. Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural 10 (4): 143–153. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2015. “Traducción de calidad de webs hoteleras: discurso interpersonal e implicación del cliente.” ONOMÁZEIN 321: 152–170. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2016. “What Can the Discursive Construction of Stance and Engagement Voices in Traveler Forums and Tourism Promotional Websites Bring to a Cultural, Cross-Generic and Disciplinary View of Interpersonality?Ibérica 311: 199–220.Google Scholar
Téllez, Nilsa, Muñiz, Carlos, y Ramírez, Jacobo. 2010. “Función discursiva en los debates televisados. Un estudio transcultural de los debates políticos en México, España y Estados Unidos.” Palabra Clave 13 (2): 251–270. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van Dijk, Teun. 2002. “Political Discourse and Ideology”. En Anàlisi del discurs polític, ed. por C. Lorda y M. Ribas, 15–34. Barcelona: IULA-UPF.Google Scholar
Wilson, John. 1990. Politically Speaking. The Pragmatic Analysis of Political Language. Oxford/Cambridge/Massachusetts: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Zupnik, Yael-Janette. 1994. “A Pragmatic Analysis of the Use of Person Deixis in Political Discourse.” Journal of Pragmatics 21 (4): 339–383. DOI logoGoogle Scholar