1895Poetics. Samuel H. Butcher (trans.). London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Bakhtin, M.M
1978 “Discourse Typology in Prose.” In Readings in Russian Poetics: Formalist and Structuralist Views. Ladislav Matejka and Krystyna Pomorska (eds), 176-196. Ann Arbor: Michigan Slavic Publications.Google Scholar
Ben-Porat, Ziva
1979 “Method in Madness: Notes on the Structure of Parody, based on Mad’s T.V. Satires.” Poetics Today 1: 245–72. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Beversluis, John
2000Cross-Examining Socrates: A Defense of the Interlocutors in Plato’s Early Dialogues. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Booth, Wayne C
1961The Rhetoric of Fiction. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
1974A Rhetoric of Irony. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
Fishelov, David
1990 “Types of Characters, Characteristics of Types.” Style 24: 422‑439.Google Scholar
2010Dialogues with/and Great Books: The Dynamics of Canon Formation. Brighton: Sussex Academic Press.Google Scholar
2013 “Types of Dialogue: Echo, Deaf and Dialectical.” Semiotica 195: 249-275.Google Scholar
Grice, Paul H
1975 “Logic and Conversation.” In Syntax and Semantics, vol. 3, Speech Acts. P. Cole and J. Morgan (eds), 41–58. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Guthrie, W.K.C
1975The History of Greek Philosophy, vol. IV. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hamell, George R
1999 “Mohawks Abroad: The 1764 Amsterdam Etching of Sychnecta.” In Indians and Europe: An Interdisciplinary Collection of Essays. Christian F. Feest (ed.), 175-190. Lincoln, Nebraska: University of Nebraska Press.Google Scholar
Hutcheon, Linda
1991 [1985]A Theory of Parody. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Johnson, James William
1958 “Tertullian and A Modest Proposal.” Modern Language and Notes 73: 561–563. Nationalhumanitiescenter.[URL] (accessed May 2013) DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Perry, Menakhem
1979 “Literary Dynamics: How the Order of a Text Creates Its Meanings.” Poetics Today1: 35–64, 311–61. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1969The Last Days of Socrates: Euthyphro, The Apology, Crito, Phaedo. Hugh Tredennick (trans.). Harmondsworth: Penguin.Google Scholar
Rawson, Claude
1984 [1978]. “Reading of A Modest Proposal.” In Literature Criticism from 1400-1800, vol. 101, Janet Vitalee (ed.), 309-320. Detroit: Gale Research Inc.Google Scholar
1990 “Final Solutions, Modest Proposals and Shortest Ways.” Cycnos 6: 107-113.Google Scholar
Sell, Roger
2001Mediating Criticism: Literary Education Humanized. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2011Communicational Criticism: Studies in literature as dialogue. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sell, Roger D., Adam Borch and Inna Lindgren
Sloan, Kim
2007A New World: England’s First view of America. London: The British Museum Press.Google Scholar
Swift, Jonathan
1814The Works of Jonathan Swift, D. D. Dean of St Patrick's, Dublin, Containing Additional Letters, Tracts, and Poems not hitherto Published, with Notes and A Life of the Author, by Walter Scott, Esq. Edinburgh: Archibald Constable et al.Google Scholar
1973The Writings of Jonathan Swift. Robert A. Greenberg and William Bowman Piper (eds). New York: W. W. Norton & Company.Google Scholar
Whitehead, Alfred N
1979 [1929] Process and Reality: An Essay in Cosmology. David Ray Griffin and Donald W. Sherburne (eds). New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Wittkowsky, George
1943 “Swift’s Modest Proposal: The Biography of an Early Georgian Pamphlet.” Journal of the History of Ideas 4: 75–104. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 2 other publications

Özönder, Sema Barutçu
2018. KUTADGU BİLİG II KUTADGU BİLİG'İN METİN TÜRÜ VE TARİHSEL DİYALEKTOLOJİ İÇİN DEĞERİ. Çukurova Üniversitesi Türkoloji Araştırmaları Dergisi 3:2  pp. 179 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 20 may 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.