Chapter 8
Linguistic indicators of persuasion in female authors in the Corpus of
English Life Sciences Texts
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Women scientists, prefaces and persuasion
- 3.Material and methodology
- 4.Data analysis and discussion
- 4.1Prefaces and bodies: General data
- a.Prefaces and bodies: Specific data
- b.Linguistic features
- 5.Concluding remarks
-
Works cited
References
Works cited
Anthony, Laurence
2018 AntConc
(Version 3.5.7) [Computer
Software]. Tokyo, Japan: Waseda University. Retrieved January 20,
2020, from
[URL]
Arakelyan, Rouzanna and Muradyan, Gevorg
2016 Language
as an Influential Tool for
Persuasion.
Armenian Folia
Anglistika, 1/15: 39–45.
Argamon, Shlomo, Moshe Koppel; Fine, Jonathan and Shimoni, Anat Rachel
2003 Gender,
Genre, and Writing Style in Formal Written
Texts.
Text, 23/3: 321–346.
Atkinson, Dwight
1999 Scientific
Discourse in Sociohistorical Context: The Philosophical Transactions
of the Royal Society of London,
1675–1975. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Barsaglini-Castro, Anabella, Valcarce, Daniel
2020 The
Coruña Corpus Tool: Ten Years
On.
Procesamiento del Lenguaje
Natural, 64: 13–19.
Bhatia, Vijay K.
1997 Genre-mixing
in academic introductions.
English
for Specific
Purposes, 16/3: 181–195.
Biber, Douglas and Conrad, Susan
2001 “
Register
variation: A corpus
approach”. In
Schiffrin, Deborah;
Tannen, Deborah and
Hamilton, Heidi (eds.),
The
handbook of discourse
analysis. Oxford: Blackwell. 175–96.
Biber, Douglas; Johansson, Stig; Leech, Geoffrey; Conrad, Susan and Finegan, Edward
1999 Longman
Grammar of Spoken and Written
English. Essex: Longman.
Biber, Douglas
1988 Variation
across Speech and Writing. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Cameron, Deborah
1992 Feminism
and Linguistic Theory. Palgrave Macmillan.
Cameron, Deborah, McAlinden, Fiona and O’Leary, Kathy
1989 “
Lakoff
in context: the social and linguistic functions of tag
questions”. In
Cameron, Deborah. and
Coates, Jennifer (eds.),
Women
in Their Speech Communities: new perspectives on language and
sex. London; New York: Longman. 74–93.
Connor, Ulla. and Upton, Thomas
2003 “
Linguistic
Dimensions of Direct Mail
Letters”. In
Leystina, Pepi and
Meyer, Charles F. (eds.),
Corpus
Analysis. Language Structure and Language
Use. Amsterdam: Rodopi. 71–86.
Crespo, Begoña
2016 On
writing Science in the Age of
Reason.
Revista Canaria de Estudios
Ingleses
(RCEI), 72: 53–78.
Dillard, James Pryce
2014 “
Language
style and
persuasion”. In
Holtgraves, Thomas (ed.),
The
Oxford Handbook of Language and Social
Psychology. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 177–187.
Gregory, Emily Lovira
1895 Elements
of Plant Anatomy. Boston, London: Published by Ginn & company.
Halliday, Michael Alexander Kirkwood
1988 “
On
the Language of Physical
Science”. In
Ghadessy, Mohsen (ed.),
Registers
of Written English: Situational Factors and Linguistic
Features. (OLS). London: Pinter. 162–178.
Hyland, Ken
2005 Stance
and engagement: a model of interaction in academic
discourse.
Discourse
Studies, 7/2: 173–192.
Hyland, K.
2015 Genre,
Discipline and identity.
Journal of
English for Academic
Purposes, 19: 32–43.
Knight, Dan
(ed.) 1986 The
Age of Science. The Scientific World-View in the Nineteenth
Century. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
Lakoff, Robin
1975 Language
and Women’s Place. New York: Harper and Row.
Lareo, Inés; Monaco, Leida Maria; Esteve-Ramos, María José and Moskowich, Isabel
(comps.)
2020 The
Corpus of English Life Sciences Texts
(CELiST).
Mischke, G. Elizabeth
2005 Analysing
involvement in distance-education study-guides: an appraisal-based
approach. UNISA. Retrieved May 20,
2020, from
[URL]
Moskowich, Isabel. and Crespo, Begoña
2014 Stance
is present in scientific writing, indeed. Evidence from the Coruña
Corpus of English Scientific
Writing.
Token. A Journal of English
Linguistics, 3: 91–114.
Moskowich, Isabel
2021 “
The
making of CELiST, a bunch of
disciplines”. In
Moskowich, Isabel;
Lareo, Inés and
Camiña, Gonzalo (eds.),
“All
families and genera”: Exploring the Corpus of English Life Sciences
Texts. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 1–19.
Moskowich, Isabel; Camiña-Riobóo, Gonzalo; Lareo, Inés and Crespo, Begoña
(comps.)
2018 Corpus
of English Philosophy Texts
(CEPhiT). A Coruña: Universidade da Coruña.
O’Keefe, Daniel J.
1990 Current
communication: An advanced text series, Vol. 2. Persuasion: Theory
and research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
Perloff, Richard M.
2003 The
Dynamics of Persuasion: Communication and Attitudes in the
Twenty-First
Century. UK: Lawrence Erlbaum Publishing.
Pratt, Anne
1840 Flowers
and their
Associations. London: Charles Knight and Co.
Prelli, Lawrence J.
1989 The
rhetorical construction of scientific
ethos. In
Simon, Herbert W. (ed.),
Rhetoric
in the human
science. London: Sage. 87–104.
Quirk, Randolph; Greenbaum, Sidney; Leech, Geoffrey and Svartvik, Jan
1985 A
Comprehensive Grammar of the English
Language. London: Longman.
Smellie, William
1790 The
philosophy of natural
history. Vol. I. Dublin: printed by William Porter.
Swales, John
1990 Genre
Analysis English in Academic and Research
Settings. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Tannen, Deborah
1993 “
The
Relativity of Linguistic Strategies: Rethinking Power and Solidarity
in Gender and
Dominance”. In
Tannen, Deborah (ed.),
Gender
and Conversational
Interaction. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 165–188.
Wakefield, Priscilla
1816 An
introduction to the Natural History and Classification of Insects,
in a series of familiar Letters. With Illustrative
Engravings. London: printed for Darton, Harvey and Darton.
Cited by
Cited by 2 other publications
Barsaglini-Castro, Anabella
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 28 april 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.