Article published in:
Pragmatics & Cognition
Vol. 25:2 (2018) ► pp. 310336
References

References

Austin, John L.
1962How to do things with words. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Aziz, Amal G. A. & Huda S. Al Qunayeer
2014Social hysteria versus individual dilemma: A pragmatic study of character relationship in Arthur Miller’s The Crucible . European Scientific Journal 10(35). 238–256.Google Scholar
Bentley, Eric
(ed.) 1972Thirty years of treason: Excerpts from hearings before the House Committee on Un-American Activities, 1938–1968. London: Thames and Hudson.Google Scholar
[ p. 333 ]
Bergeron, David M.
1969Arthur Miller’s The Crucible and Nathaniel Hawthorne: Some parallels. The English Journal 58(1). 47–55. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bonnet, Jean M.
1982Society vs. the individual in Arthur Miller’s The Crucible . English Studies 63(1). 32–36. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Brown, Penelope & Stephen C. Levinson
1987Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Budick, Miller
1985History and other spectres in Arthur Miller’s The Crucible . Modern Drama 28(4). 535–552. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Carr, Robert K.
1950The Un-American Activities Committee. The University of Chicago Law Review 18(3). 598–633. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ciekawy, Diane
2005Witchcraft. In Maryanne C. Horowitz (ed.), New dictionary of the history of ideas, vol. 6, 2476–2479. New York: Thomson Gale.Google Scholar
Cook, Guy
1994Discourse and literature. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Culpeper, Jonathan
2001Language and characterisation: People in plays and other texts. New York & London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Culpeper, Jonathan & Carolina Fernandez-Quintanilla
2017Fictional characterisation. In Miriam A. Locher & Andreas H. Jucker (eds.), Pragmatics of fiction, 93–128. Berlin & Boston: de Gruyter Mouton. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Culpeper, Jonathan & Dan McIntyre
2010Activity types and characterisation in dramatic discourse. In James Eder, Fotis Jannidis & Ralf Schneider (eds.), Characters in fictional worlds: Understanding imaginary beings in literature, film, and other media, 176–207. Berlin & New York: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Culpeper, Jonathan, Mick Short & Peter Verdonk
(eds.) 1998Exploring the language of drama: From text to context. New York & London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Dijk, Teun Adrianus van
1987Communicating racism: Ethnic prejudice in thought and talk. Newbury Park: Sage.Google Scholar
1988Social cognition, social power and social discourse. Text – Interdisciplinary Journal for the Study of Discourse 8(1–2). 129–157. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1990Social cognition and discourse. In Howard Giles & William P. Robinson (eds.), Handbook of language and social psychology, 163–183. Chichester: Wiley.Google Scholar
Dynel, Marta
2016Comparing and combining covert and overt untruthfulness: On lying, deception, irony and metaphor. Pragmatics & Cognition 23(1). 174–208. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fiske, Susan T. & Steven L. Neuberg
1990A continuum of impression formation, from category-based to individuating processes: Influences of information and motivation on attention and interpretation. In Mark P. Zanna (ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology, vol. 23, 1–74. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Fiske, Susan T. & Shelley E. Taylor
1991Social cognition, 2nd edn. New York: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
Grice, Herbert P.
1975Logic and conversation. In Peter Cole & Jerry L. Morgan (eds.), Syntax and semantics: Speech acts, vol. 3, 41–58. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
1989Studies in the way of words. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Hamilton, Craig
2007The cognitive rhetoric of Arthur Miller’s The Crucible . In Marina Lambrou & Peter Stockwell (eds.), Contemporary stylistics, 221–231. London & New York: Continuum.Google Scholar
[ p. 334 ]
2011Allegory, blending, and censorship in modern literature. Journal of Literary Semantics 40(1). 23–42. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Jones, Edward E.
1990Interpersonal perception. New York: W. H. Freeman.Google Scholar
Jones, Edward E. & Keith E. Davis
1965From acts to dispositions: The attribution process in person perception. In Leonard Berkowitz (ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology, vol. 2, 219–266. New York: Academic Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Jones, Edward E. & Daniel McGillis
1976Correspondent inferences and the attribution cube: A comparative reappraisal. In John H. Harvey, William J. Ickes & Robert F. Kidd (eds.), New directions in attribution research, vol. 1. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Kelley, Harold H.
1967Attribution theory in social psychology. In David Levine (ed.), Nebraska symposium on motivation, 192–238. Lincoln, Nebraska: University of Nebraska Press.Google Scholar
1972Attribution in social interaction. In Edward E. Jones, David E. Kanouse & Harold H. Kelley (eds.), Attribution perceiving the causes of behavior, 1–26. Morristown, NJ: General Learning Press.Google Scholar
1973The processes of causal attribution. American Psychologist 28(2). 107–128. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lowe, Valerie
1998Unhappy confessions in The Crucible: A pragmatic explanation. In Jonathan Culpeper, Mick Short & Peter Verdonk (eds.), Exploring the language of drama: From text to context, 128–141. New York & London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Martin, Robert A.
1977Arthur Miller’s The Crucible: Background and sources. Modern Drama 20(3). 279–292. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Miller, Arthur
1953The Crucible: A play in four acts. Harmondsworth, England: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
Morgan, Edmund S.
2008Arthur Miller’s The Crucible and the Salem witch trials: A historian’s view. In Harold Bloom (ed.), Bloom’s modern critical interpretations: Arthur Miller’s The Crucible, new edn., 41–53. New York: Infobase Publishing.Google Scholar
Saari, Peggy
2001Witchcraft in America (Elizabeth Shaw ed.). Detroit MI: UXL, Gale Group.Google Scholar
Searle, John R.
1969Speech acts: An essay in the philosophy of language. London: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1975Indirect speech acts. In Peter Cole & Jerry L. Morgan (eds.), Syntax and semantics, vol. 3, 59–82. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Sogliuzzo, A. Richard
2012Arthur Miller’s The Crucible: Witchcraft and mob hysteria in America. In Nancy van Deusen & Leonard M. Koff (eds.), Mobs: An interdisciplinary inquiry, vol. 3, 363–382. Leiden: Brill. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sperber, Dan & Deirdre Wilson
1986Relevance: Communication and cognition. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Stine, Jean C.
1983Contemporary literary criticism (Jean C. Stine ed.), vol. 26. Detroit MI: Gale Research Inc.Google Scholar
United States
1951–52[Communist activities] Hearings before the Committee on Un-American Activities, House of Representatives, eighty-second congress, first-second sessions. Washington: Government Printing Office. Retrieved from https://​catalog​.hathitrust​.org​/Record​/102263472 (24 December 2018)
[ p. 335 ]
1953–54[Communist activities] Hearings before the Committee on Un-American Activities, House of Representatives, eighty-third congress, first-[second] session[s]. Washington: Government Printing Office. Retrieved from https://​catalog​.hathitrust​.org​/Record​/102263647 (24 December 2018)
1955–56Hearing[s] before the Committee on Un-American Activities, House of Representatives, eighty-fourth congress, first-second sessions. Washington: Government Printing Office. Retrieved from https://​catalog​.hathitrust​.org​/Record​/102263648 (24 December 2018)
Weisman, Richard
1984Witchcraft, magic and religion in 17th century Massachusetts. Amherst: The University of Massachusetts Press.Google Scholar
Wyer, Robert S. & Thomas K. Srull
(eds.) 1984Handbook of social cognition, vol. 1. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
[ p. 336 ]