Part of
Corpora and Rhetorically Informed Text Analysis: The diverse applications of DocuScope
Edited by David West Brown and Danielle Zawodny Wetzel
[Studies in Corpus Linguistics 109] 2023
► pp. 224
Allison, S., Heuser, R., Jockers, M., Moretti, F., & Witmore, M.
(2011) Quantitative formalism: An experiment. In Stanford Literary Lab Pamphlet 1. Stanford University, Literary Lab, Department of English.Google Scholar
Al-Malki, A., Kaufer, D., Ishizaki, S., & Dreher, K.
(2012) Arab women in Arab news: Old stereotypes and new media. Bloomsbury Academic.Google Scholar
(2010) Rhetoric. W. D. Ross (Editor), W. Roberts (Trans.) Cosimo Classics, Kindle available at [URL]
Beigman Klebanov, B., Ramineni, C., Kaufer, D., Yeoh, P., & Ishizaki, S.
(2019) Advancing the validity argument for standardized writing tests using quantitative rhetorical analysis. Language Testing, 16(1), 125–144. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bell, J. S.
(2004) Write great fiction: Plot & structure. Writer’s Digest Books. [URL]
Bitzer, L.
(1968) The rhetorical situation. Philosophy and Rhetoric, 1(1), 1–14.Google Scholar
Ceccarelli, L.
(1998) Polysemy: Multiple meanings in rhetorical criticism. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 84(4), 395–415. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chafe, W.
(1994) Discourse, consciousness, and time: The flow and displacement of conscious experience in speaking and writing. The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Collins, J.
(2003) Variations in written English: Characterizing the rhetorical language choices in the Brown Corpus of Texts (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Carnegie Mellon University
Connor, U.
(1990) Linguistic/Rhetorical Measures for International Persuasive Student Writing. Research in the Teaching of English, 24(1), 67–87.Google Scholar
Daneš, F.
(1970) One instance of Prague School methodology. In P. Garvin (Ed.), Method and theory in linguistics (pp. 132–146). Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1974) Functional sentence perspective and the organization of the text. In F. Daneš (Ed.), Papers on functional sentence perspective (pp. 106–127). Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Davies, M.
(2008) Corpus of Contemporary American English. Brigham Young University. Retrieved on 19 January 2023 from [URL]
(2013) Corpus of News on the Web (NOW): 3+ billion words from 20 countries, updated every day. Retrieved on 19 January 2023 from [URL]
(2018) The iWeb Corpus. Retrieved on 19 January 2023 from [URL]
Erasmus, D.
(1512/1978) “Copia”: Foundations of the abundant style (De duplici copia verborum ac rerum commentarii duo). In C. R. Thompson (Ed.), Collected Works of Erasmus (Vol. 24). University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
Faigley, L., & Witte, S.
(1983) Topical focus in technical writing. In P. V. Anderson, J. R. Brockman, & C. R. Miller (Eds.), New essays in technical and scientific communication: Research, theory, practice (pp. 59–68). Baywood/Routledge.Google Scholar
Firbas, J.
(1992) Functional sentence perspective in written and spoken communication. Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gruber, William E.
(1977) “Servile copying” and the teaching of English composition. College English, 39(December), 491–497. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Halliday, M.
(1967) Notes on transitivity and theme in English (Part 2). Journal of Linguistics, 3(2), 199–244. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1968) Notes on transitivity and theme in English (Part 3). Journal of Linguistics, 4(2), 179–215. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Halliday, M., & Hasan, R.
(1976) Cohesion in English. Longman. [URL]
Halliday, M., & Matthiessen, C. M.
(2014) Halliday’s introduction to functional grammar. Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hart, R.
(2000) Campaign talk: Why elections are good for us. Princeton University Press. [URL]
(2018) Diction 7.0. Sage. [URL]
Hawes, T.
(2015) Thematic progression in the writing of students and professionals. Ampersand, 2, 93–100. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Helberg, A., Poznahovska, M., Ishizaki, S., Kaufer, D., Werner, N., & Wetzel, D.
(2018) Teaching textual awareness with DocuScope using corpus-driven tools and reflection to support students’ decision-making. Assessing Writing, 38, 40–45. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hope, J., & Witmore, M.
(2004) The very large textual object: A prosthetic reading of Shakespeare. Early Modern Literary Studies, 6(1), 1–36.Google Scholar
(2010) The Hundredth Psalm to the Tune of “Green Sleeves”: Digital Approaches to Shakespeare’s Language of Genre. Shakespeare Quarterly, 61(3), 357–390. [URL].
Hopper, P.
(1999) A short course in grammar. Norton. [URL]
Hyland, K.
(2005) Metadiscourse. Exploring interaction in writing. Bloomsbury Academic. [URL]Google Scholar
Ishizaki, S., & Kaufer, D.
(2011) Computer-aided rhetorical analysis. In P. M. McCarthy & C. Boonthum-Denecke (Eds.), Applied natural language processing and content analysis (pp. 276–296). Information Science Reference. [URL]Google Scholar
(2020) Scalable writing pedagogy for strengthening cohesion with interactive visualization. In Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Professional Communication (ProComm 2020) (pp. 141–145) DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kaufer, D., & Butler, B.
(1996) Rhetoric and the arts of design. Routledge. [URL]Google Scholar
(2000) Designing interactive worlds with words: Principles of writing as representational composition. Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kaufer, D., & Hariman, R.
(2009) A corpus analysis evaluating Hariman’s Theory of Political Style. Text and Talk, 28, 475–500. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kaufer, D., & Ishizaki, S.
(2023) Computer-aided close reading: Visualizing contrastive persuasion strategies. In J. Fahnestock & R. Harris (Eds.), Routledge handbook of persuasion. Routledge. [URL]
Kaufer, D., Ishizaki, S., Collins, J., & Butler, B.
(2004) The power of words: Unveiling the speaker and writer’s hidden craft. Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kennedy, G.
(1963) The art of persuasion in Greece. Princeton University Press. [URL]Google Scholar
(1972/2008) The art of rhetoric in the Roman World 300BC to 300AD. Princeton University Press. [URL]Google Scholar
King, M. L.
(1963) “I have a dream.” The American Rhetoric Website. Retrieved on 19 January 2023 from [URL]
Lanham, R.
(2007) The economics of attention. The University of Chicago Press. [URL]
Leong, A. P.
(2015) Topical themes and thematic progression: The “picture” of research articles. Text and Talk, 35(3), 289–315. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2016) Thematic density of research-article abstracts: A systemic-functional account. Word, 62(4), 209–227. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2019) Visualizing texts: A tool for generating thematic-progression diagrams. Functional Linguistics, 6(1), article 4. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lincoln/Douglas Debates of 1858
nd). Retrieved on 19 January 2023 from [URL]. Debates from the Abraham Lincoln Foundation. [URL]
Marcellino, W.
(2020) Building writing analytic systems. Paper presented at the 9th International Conference on Writing Analytics, St. Petersburg, Florida, February 6–8.
Miller, C.
(1984) Genre as social action. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 70(2), 151–167. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nekula, M.
(1999) “Vilém Mathesius”. Handbook of Pragmatics. Amsterdam: Benjamins: 1–14.Google Scholar
Shabana, N. O.
(2018) Topical structure analysis: Assessing first-year Egyptian university students’ internal coherence of their EFL writing. In A. Ahmed & H. Abouabdelkader (Eds.), Assessing ESL writing in the 21st century: Revealing the unknown (pp. 53–78). Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sinclair, J. M.
(Ed.) (1995) Collins COBUILD English dictionary. HarperCollins. [URL]
Swales, J.
(1990) Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Taboada, M., & Brooke, J.
(2011) Lexicon-based methods for sentiment analysis. Computational Linguistics, 37(2), 272–274. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vande Kopple, W. J.
(1989) Clear and coherent prose: A functional approach. Scott Foresman. [URL]
Williams, J.
(2000) Style: The basics of clarity and grace (5th ed.). Pearson.Google Scholar
Witte, S.
(1983a) Topical structure and writing quality: Some possible text-based explanations of readers’ judgments of student writing. Visible Language, XVII, 177–205. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1983b) Topical structure and revision: An exploratory study. College Composition and Communication, 34(3), 313–341. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wray, A., & Perkins, M.
(2000) The functions of formulaic language: An integrated model. Language & Communication, 20, 1–28. DOI logoGoogle Scholar