Cover not available
Part of
Writing(s) at the Crossroads: The process–product interface
Edited by Georgeta Cislaru
[Not in series 194] 2015
► pp. 1–18

Writing(s) at the crossroads

The process-product interface

| CLESTHIA, Université Sorbonne nouvelle Paris 3
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives (CC BY-NC-ND) 4.0 license.

For any use beyond this license, please contact the publisher at [email protected].

Published online: 5 August 2015
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/z.194.01cis
References (70)
References
Alamargot, Denis, and Lucile Chanquoy (Eds.). 2001. Through the Models of Writing. Studies in Writing, Vol. 9. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Allal, Linda, Lucile Chanquoy, and Pierre Largy (Eds). 2004. Revision: Cognitive and Instructional Processes (Vol. 13). Dordrecht et al.: Kluwer Academic Publishers. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Anokhina, Olga, and Sabine Pétillon. 2009. Critique génétique: concepts, méthodes, outils. Paris: IMEC.Google Scholar
Baaijen, Veerle Marije. 2012. The Development of Understanding Through Writing. Groningen Dissertations in Linguistics 107.Google Scholar
Barton, David, and Uta Papen (Eds.). 2010a. The Anthropology of Writing: Understanding Textually Mediated Worlds. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Barton, David and Uta Papen. 2010b. “What is the anthropology of writing?” In The Anthropology of Writing: Understanding Textually Mediated Worlds, ed. by David Barton, and Uta Papen, 4–32. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Bazerman, Charles (Ed.). 2007. Handbook of Research on Writing: History, Society, School, Individual, Text. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Bazerman, Charles, and Paul A. Prior (Eds.). 2004. What Writing Does and How It Does It. An Introduction to Analyzing Texts and Textual Practices. Mahwah, NJ/London: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Beaugrande, Robert de. 1984. Text Production: Toward a Science of Composition. Norwood, N.J.: Ablex. Google Scholar
Bednarek, Monika. 2009. “Language patterns and Attitude.” Functions of Language 16(2): 165–192. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
van den Bergh, Huub, and Gert Rijlaarsdam. 1996. “The dynamics of composing: modeling writing process data.” In The Science of Writing. Theories, Methods, Individual Differences and Applications, ed. by C. Michael Levy, and Sarah Ransdell, 207–231. Mahwah: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Berninger, Virginia W. (Ed.). 2012. Past, Present and Future Contributions of Cognitive Writing Research to Cognitive Psychology. New York/London: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Berninger, Virginia W., and Todd L. Richards. 2002. Brain Literacy for Educators and Psychologists. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Bhatia, Vijay K. 1993. Analysing Genre. Language Use in Professional Settings. London/New York: Longman.Google Scholar
Biber, Douglas, Susan Conrad, and Viviana Cortes. 2004. “If you look at…: Lexical bundles in university teaching and textbooks.” Applied Linguistics 25(3): 371–405. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Boutet, Josiane. 1997 [1994]. Construire le sens. Berne: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Branca-Rosoff, Sonia, and Nathalie Schneider. 1994. L’écriture des citoyens. Une analyselinguistique de l’écrituredes peu lettrés pendant la période révolutionnaire. Paris: Klincksieck.Google Scholar
Brandt, Deborah. 1990. Literacy as Involvement: The Acts of Writers, Readers and Texts. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.Google Scholar
Candlin, Christopher N., and Ken Hyland (Eds.). 1999. Writing: Text, Processes, and Practices. Harlow: Addison Wesley Longman.Google Scholar
Cislaru, Georgeta. 2014. “Contraintes linguistiques et contextuelles dans la production écrite.” Les Carnets du Cediscor 12: 55–74.Google Scholar
Courtine, Jean-Jacques. 1981. “La notion de ‘condition de production de discours’.” Langaages 15(62): 19–32. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Doquet-Lacoste, Claire. 2004. “Genèse des textes, genèse des scripteurs: regards sur la langue dans l’écriture.” In Ecriture. Approches en sciences cognitives, ed. by Annie Piolat, 233–250. Aix-en-Provence: Publication de l’Université de Provence.Google Scholar
Fenoglio, Irène, and Lucile Chanquoy (Eds.). 2007. Avant le texte: les traces de l’élaboration textuelle. Special issue of Langue française 155.Google Scholar
Flower, Linda. 1994. The Construction of Negotiated Meaning: A Social Cognitive Theory of Writing. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois Press.Google Scholar
Fraenkel, Béatrice. 2007. “Actes d’écriture: Quand écrire c’est faire.” Langage & Société 121–122: 101–112. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2010. “Writing Acts: When Writing Is Doing.” In The Anthropology of Writing: Understanding Textually Mediated Worlds, ed. by David Barton and Uta Papen, 33–43. London/New York: Continuum.Google Scholar
Fuchs, Catherine, Almuth Grésillon, Jean-Louis Lebrave, Jean Peytard, and Josette Rey-Debove. 2003[1982]. La genèse du texte. Les modèles linguistiques. Paris: CNRS Editions.Google Scholar
Galbraith, David. 2009. “Cognitive models of writing.” German as a Foreign Language 2–3: 7–22.Google Scholar
Gee, James Paul. 2000. “The New Literacy Studies. From ‘socially situated’ to the work of the social.” In Situated Literacies. Reading and Writing in Context, ed. by David Barton, Mary Hamilton, and Roz Ivanič, 180–196. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Gehle, Quentin L., and Duncan J. Rollo. 1977. The Writing Process. Toronto: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Hay, Louis. 1996. “History or Genesis?” Yale French Studies 89: 191–207. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hayes, John R., and Linda S. Flower. 1980. “Identifying the Organization of Writing Processes.” In Cognitive Process in Writing, ed. by Lee Gregg, and Erwin R. Steinberg, 3–30. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Hyland, Ken. 2005. Metadiscourse. Exploring Interaction in Writing. London/New York: Continuum.Google Scholar
Hymes, Dell. 1971. On Communicative Competence. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Keseling, Gisbert. 1992. “Pause and intonation contours in written and oral discourse.” In Cooperating with Written Texts. The Pragmatics and Comprehension of Written Texts, ed. by Dieter Stein, 31–66. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Leijten, Mariëlle, and Luuk Van Waes. 2006. “Inputlog: New Perspectives on the Logging of On-Line Writing.” In Studies in Writing: Vol. 18. Computer Key-Stroke Logging and Writing: Methods and Applications, ed. by Kirk P.H. Sullivan, and Eva Lindgren, 73–94. Oxford: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Leijten, Mariëlle, Lieve Macken, Véronique Hoste, Erik Van Horenbeeck, and Luuk Van Waes. 2012. “From Character to Word Level: Enabling the Linguistic Analyses of Inputlog Process Data.” In Linguistic and Cognitive Aspects of Document Creation and Document Engineering. Proceedings of the Second Workshop on Computational Linguistics and Writing (Avignon, CLW 2012), ed. by Michael Piotrowski, Cerstin Mahlow, and Robert Dale, 1–8. ACL: Stroudsburg.Google Scholar
Lindgren, Eva, Mariëlle Leijten, and Luuk Van Waes. 2008. “Writing development and knowledge crafting.” Conference Writing Research Across Borders, Santa-Barbara.
Macken, Lieve, Véronique Hoste, Mariëlle Leijten, and Luuk Van Waes. 2012. “From keystrokes to annotated process data: Enriching the output of Inputlog with linguistic information.” Proceedings of the Eight International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC’12), 2224–2229. Istanbul: Turkey.
Maingueneau, Dominique. 1984. Genèses du discours. Liège: Mardaga.Google Scholar
Murray, Donald D. 1972. “Teach language as a process not product.” The Leaflet, November 1972 11–14. á[URL]ñGoogle Scholar
Olive, Thierry, Ronald T. Kellogg, and Annie Piolat. 2008. “Verbal, visual and spatial working memory demands during text composition.” Applied Psycholinguistics 29: 669–687. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Olive, Thierry, Rui A. Alves, and São Luís Castro. 2009. “Cognitive processes in writing during pauses and execution periods.” European Journal of Cognitive Psychology 21: 758–785. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Olive, Thierry, and Jean-Michel Passerault. 2012. “The visuospatial dimension of writing.” Written Communication 29: 326–344. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pearce, Lynn. 2010. “‘Writing’ and ‘region’ in the 21st century: Epistemological reflections on regionally-located art and literature in the wake of the digital revolution.” European Journal of Cultural Studies 13: 27–41. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Perrin, Daniel (Ed.). 2003a. Pragmatics of Writing. Special issue of Journal of Pragmatics 35(6).Google Scholar
. 2003b. “Towards a Pragmatics of Writing.” Journal of Pragmatics 35(6): 825–828. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2013. The Linguistics of Newswriting. Amsterdam, New York et al.: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Perrin, Daniel, and Marc Wildi. 2010. “Statistical modeling of writing processes.” In The Traditions of Writing Research, ed. by Charles Bazerman, 378–393. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Plane, Sylvie, Thierry Olive, and Denis Alamargot (Eds.). 2010. Traitement des contraintes de la production d’écrits: aspects linguistiques et psycholinguistiques. Special issue of Langages 177.Google Scholar
Prior, Paul. 2004. “Tracing Process: How Texts Come Into Being.” In What Writing Does and How It Does It. An Introduction to Analyzing Texts and Textual Practices, ed. by Charles Bazerman, and Paul A. Prior, 167–200. Mahwah, NJ/London: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
. 2006. “A Sociocultural theory of writing.” In Handbook of Writing Research, ed. by Charles A. MacArthur, Steve Graham, and Jill Fitzgerald, 54–66. New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
Sanders, Ted, and Carel Van Wijk. 1996. “Text analysis as a research tool. How hierarchical text structure contributes to the understanding of conceptual processes in writing.” In The Science of Writing. Theories, Methods, Individual Differences and Applications, ed. by Michael C. Levy, and Sarah Ransdell, 251–270. Mahwah: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Schleppegrell, Mary J. 2007. “Grammar, the Sentence, and Traditions of Linguistic Analysis.” In Handbook of Research on Writing: History, Society, School, Individual, Text, ed. by Charles Bazerman, 673–691. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Severinson-Eklundh, Kerstin, and Py Kollberg. 2001. “Studying writers’ revision patterns with s-notation analysis.” In Contemporary Tools and Techniques for Studying Writing, ed. by Thierry Olive, and Michael C. Levy, 89–104. Dordrecht/Boston/London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
Sinclair, John. 2004. Trust the Text. Language, Corpus and Discourse. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Spelman Miller, Kristyan, and Kirk P.H. Sullivan. 2006. “Keystroke logging: an introduction.” In Computer Keystroke Logging: Methods and Applications, ed. by Kirk P.H. Sullivan, and Eva Lindgren, 1–9. Oxford: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Stein, Dieter. 1992. “Cooperating with written texts: Towards a science of the text. Issues and overview.” In Cooperating with Written Texts. The Pragmatics and Comprehension of Written Texts, ed. by Dieter Stein, 1–12. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Strömqvist, Sven, Kenneth Holmqvist, Victoria Johansson, Henrik Karlsson, and Åsa Wengelin. 2006. “What keystroke logging can reveal about writing.” In Computer Keystroke Logging: Methods and Applications, ed. by Kirk P.H. Sullivan, and Eva Lindgren, 45–71. Oxford: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Stubbs, Michael. 1997. “Critical comments on Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA).” In Evolving Models of Language, ed. by Ann Ryan, and Alison Wray, 100–116. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Sullivan, Kirk P.H., and Eva Lindgren (Eds). 2006. Computer Key-Stroke Logging and Writing (Studies in Writing, Methods and Applications, vol. 18). Oxford: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Tolchinsky, Liliana, Joan Perera, and Noemi Argerich. 1999. “Units of analysis in two approaches to text analysis.” In Writing and Learning to Write at the Dawn of the 21st Century. 1998 Writing Conference Proceedings, ed. by Marie-Françoise Crété, and Eric Espéret, 339–344. Poitiers: LaCo-CNRS, Maison des Sciences de l’Homme et de la Société, Université de Poitiers.Google Scholar
Torrance, Mark, Denis Alamargot, Montserrat Castelló, Franck Ganier, Otto Kruse, Anne Mangen, Liliana Tolchinsky, and Luuk Van Waes (Eds.). 2012. Learning to Write Effectively: Current Trends in European Research. Studies in Writing, vol. 25. Brill.Google Scholar
Torrance, Mark, and David Galbraith (Eds). 1999. Knowing What to Write: Conceptual Processes in Text Production. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van der Geest, Thea. 1996. “Studying ‘real life’ writing processes. A proposal and an example.” In The Science of Writing. Theories, Methods, Individual Differences, and Applications, ed. by C. Michael Levy, and Sarah Ransdell, 309–322. Mahwah: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Van Waes, Luuk, and Anne Mangen. 2012. “Introduction. Tools for studying and supporting writing. Technological advances in writing research.” In Learning to Write Effectively. Current Trends in European Research, ed. by Mark Torrance, Denis Alamargot, Montserrat Castello, Franck Ganier, Otto Kruse, Anne Mangen, Liliana Tolchinsky, and Luuk Van Waes, 345–351. Bingley: Emerald.Google Scholar
Verschueren, Jeff, and Frank Brisard. 2009. “Adaptability.” In Key Notions for Pragmatics, ed. by Jeff Verschueren and Jan-Ola Östman, 28–47. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vygotsky, Lev S. 1978. Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Ed. by Michael Cole, Vera John-Steiner, Sylvia Scribner, and Ellen Souberman. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Wodak, Ruth. 1992. “Strategies in text production and text comprehension: A new perspective.” In Cooperating with Written Texts. The Pragmatics and Comprehension of Written Texts, ed. by Dieter Stein, 493–528. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Kroll, Jeri
2018. The creative writing doctoral thesis: insights from genetic criticism. New Writing 15:2 ► pp. 148 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 24 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.